Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “division”

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.

At least 991 records · Page 55

Trend Analysis of AI/ML Tools and Services in NASA

Usage of Machine Learning (ML) algorithms within NASA’s Science Mission Directorates have been increasing over theyears. This can be quantitatively observed in the upward trends of ML usage found by analyzing the publications andpresentations (in affiliation with NASA) available through NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS) and PubMed Central(PMC). Identifying the problem types and class of ML algorithms used to tackle them across the divisions can presentopportunities for collaborations, interdisciplinary projects and knowledge transfer for sustainable partnerships. In thispresentation, we will present the trend analysis of ML algorithms used in different SMD divisions based on the publicationsand presentations publicly available. We identify these trends by leveraging ML algorithms which are able to search throughthe publication texts semantically; which are also highly scalable. We will also present an analysis on the available opensource tools and services in NASA leveraging AI/ML algorithms. This work will provide ample avenues for collaborativeefforts across different disciplines based on the surfaced trends.

Slesa Adhikari↗

Overview of NASA’s Science Mission Directorate Small Satellites Programs and Advances in Transformative Science Measurements with Small Satellites

Small satellites have become an accepted platform for enabling high-quality science measurements and observations. NASA missions have leveraged advances in sensor miniaturization, technology innovations, and new small satellite mission architectures to support high spatial and temporal measurements, continuity measurements, and constellations in response to science objectives described in NASA’s Decadal Surveys. Across six divisions of the Science Mission Directorate (SMD), over 12 years, SMD has funded 88 CubeSat/ SmallSat Missions and 59 Studies to date. Currently, SMD has 53 small spacecraft science missions (87spacecraft) in implementation or formulation. This paper provides the background of efforts to promote the implementation of small satellites within NASA as a balanced portfolio for the agency’s science, technology, and exploration goals. We include analysis of SmallSat awards and trends funded by SMD through Research Opportunities in Space and Earth Sciences (ROSES), Small Innovative Missions for Planetary Exploration (SIMPLEx), and Small Explorer (SMEX) and Medium Explorer (MIDEX) calls over the last 12years. The data source of this assessment is a subset of the NASA SmallSat Coordination Group Database, a collection of all known funded NASA SmallSat and CubeSat missions and studies. This paper also provides an overview of small satellite programs and selected missions from SMD’s divisions: Astrophysics, Heliophysics, Earth Science, and Planetary Science, and describes SMD’s efforts in fostering an incremental and continuous path to achieve high-priority science through transformative science measurements. This paper recognizes the latest observations and trends of the NASA CubeSat / SmallSat Science missions with masses ranging between 1kg to 500kg.

Small Satellites, SMD SmallSat, CubeSat,↗

Advances in Transformative Science Measurements with Small Satellites

Small satellites have become an accepted platform for enabling high-quality science measurements and observations. NASA missions have leveraged advances in sensor miniaturization, technology innovations, and new small satellite mission architectures to support high spatial and temporal measurements, continuity measurements, and constellations in response to science objectives described in NASA’s Decadal Surveys. Across six divisions of the Science Mission Directorate (SMD), over 12 years, SMD has funded 88 CubeSat/ SmallSat Missions and 59 Studies to date. Currently, SMD has 53 small spacecraft science missions (87spacecraft) in implementation or formulation. This paper provides the background of efforts to promote the implementation of small satellites within NASA as a balanced portfolio for the agency’s science, technology, and exploration goals. We include analysis of SmallSat awards and trends funded by SMD through Research Opportunities in Space and Earth Sciences (ROSES), Small Innovative Missions for Planetary Exploration (SIMPLEx), and Small Explorer (SMEX) and Medium Explorer (MIDEX) calls over the last 12years. The data source of this assessment is a subset of the NASA SmallSat Coordination Group Database, a collection of all known funded NASA SmallSat and CubeSat missions and studies. This paper also provides an overview of small satellite programs and selected missions from SMD’s divisions: Astrophysics, Heliophysics, Earth Science, and Planetary Science, and describes SMD’s efforts in fostering an incremental and continuous path to achieve high-priority science through transformative science measurements. This presentation recognizes the latest observations and trends of the NASA CubeSat / SmallSat Science missions with masses ranging between 1kg to 500kg.

Small Satellites, SMD SmallSat, CubeSat↗

Current and Future ESPO Supported Missions

The Earth Science Project Office (ESPO) at NASA Ames Research Center is a group of success-oriented individuals providing project management for NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Earth Science Division. We provide planning, implementation, and post-mission support for large, complex, multi-agency, domestic and international field campaigns. ESPO has led over 60 successful field campaigns, dating back to 1987. ESPO supports several of NASA's Earth Science Division’s programs, including Upper Atmosphere Research, Tropospheric Chemistry, Radiation Sciences, Weather and Atmospheric Dynamics, Ocean Biology and Biochemistry, Airborne Science, and the Earth System Science Pathfinder Program.

Erin Czech↗

NASA’s Student Airborne Science Activation for Minority Serving Institutions: Inaugural Program, Educational Outcomes, and Lessons Learned

The NASA Student Airborne Science Activation (SaSa) for Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs) held its inaugural summer research program for early career undergraduates interested in the Geosciences. SaSa is a NASA Science Activation funded 8-week summer internship program. Twenty-four first- and second-year undergraduates from MSIs across the U.S. participated in the summer program - June 6 to July 29, 2022. Students had the opportunity to gain hands-on research experience in all components of an airborne science campaign including flying on-board a NASA research aircraft to collect atmospheric measurements. Students conducted independent research projects related to the atmosphere, ocean, and geosciences that feed into NASA’s broader Earth Science Division’s and Decadal Survey goals using air quality, meteorological, and oceanic measurements from surface, airborne, and satellite-based observations. The program split its time between partner institution, University of Maryland Baltimore County and NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility in Wallops Island, Virginia. Students also made site visits at partner institutions, including: Hampton University, University of Maryland Eastern Shore, Morgan State University, Howard University, and Coppin State University and attended lectures from visiting faculty and NASA Subject Matter Experts. Students were guided on their research projects by near-peer graduate mentors, SaSa program leadership, co-Is at partner institutions, and NASA scientists to address two major research themes: 1) how human-caused air pollution has human and environmental implications, and 2) how large-scale meteorological factors influence local weather conditions. Students sorted into research groups, based on sub-discipline areas in the Geosciences, including: “Clouds, Aerosols and Radiation”, “Meteorology and Planetary Boundary Layer”, “Air Quality: Particle Pollution and Trace Gases”, and “Air-Water-Land Interface”. Their research was presented as 3-minute lightning talks and in-person poster presentations at a close-out event at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. The students’ inter- and trans-disciplinary research experiences centered in the use of multiple ground, airborne, and satellite remote sensing NASA Earth Science Division assets. Providing a unique experience aligned to recognize the societal benefits that NASA contributes in the areas of resource management, air quality monitoring and policy decisions, energy and weather predictions, and research on the Earth’s climate. The SaSa program aims to increase the number of students from MSIs that identify as underrepresented or underserved individuals in the Geosciences discipline, Earth System Science graduate programs, and the NASA workforce. A summary of the summer research program, educational, scientific, and programmatic outcomes, as well as lessons learned will be presented.

NASA↗

Atmospheric Research 2021 Technical Highlights

Welcome to the 2021 Atmospheres Highlights report. Here, we summarize research and scientific communication/outreach accomplishments from the portion of atmospheric science activities at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) that comprises the Earth Science Division’s Atmospheres organization. As in previous years, this report is intended for a broad audience, including colleagues within NASA, scientists outside the Agency, science graduate students, and members of the public. Organizationally, the report covers research activities under the Office of Deputy Director for Atmospheres (610AT), which is within Earth Sciences Division (Code 610) in the Sciences and Exploration Directorate (600). Laboratories and office within 610AT include: Mesoscale Atmospheric Processes Laboratory (612), Climate and Radiation Laboratory (613), Atmospheric Chemistry and Dynamics Laboratory (614), and the Wallops Field Support Office (610.W). As of this writing, the 266 personnel in Code 610AT consist of 53 civil servants and 213 cooperative agreement associates, postdoctoral fellows and contractors.

Annual Report↗

The NASA Facility for Astromaterials Research at the Johnson Space Center – A National Laboratory for Planetary Research

The Astromaterials Research and Exploration Science (ARES) Division at the NASA Johnson Space Center houses a unique combination of laboratories, instruments, infrastructure, technical ex-pertise, and other assets for conducting broad-based world-class planetary research. These facilities have been accessed for decades by hundreds of external scientists, including faculty, post-docs, students, and interns, most at no cost and on a collaborative basis. With funding through NASA’s Planetary Science Enabling Facilities (PSEF) program, we have estab-lished the NASA Facility for Astromaterials Research (NFAR) to expand access to and enhance these labora-tories for a diverse and inclusive external user base, thus maximizing the science return from research funded by R&A programs in NASA’s Planetary Sci-ence Division (PSD). NFAR enables cutting edge planetary sample analyses, making new scientific dis-coveries possible, in addition to training the next-generation of planetary scientists. NFAR laboratories are co-located with JSC Curation that houses all NASA-controlled astromaterials collections, thus ena-bling direct access to both research and curation exper-tise, to facilitate specialized sample handling and anal-ysis of allocated samples (from JSC and other sample collections) to PIs, particularly those affiliated with institutions that historically have limited or no access to in-house analytical or experimental facilities.

J Filiberto↗

Vertical Structure in Phytoplankton Growth and Productivity Inferred From Biogeochemical-Argo Floats and the Carbon-Based Productivity Model

Estimates of marine net primary production (NPP) commonly rely on limited in situ 14C incubations or satellite-based algorithms mainly constrained to the surface ocean. Here we combine data from biogeochemical Argo floats with a carbon-based productivity model (CbPM) to compute vertically-resolved estimates of NPP. Inferred NPP profiles derived by informing the CbPM with float-based, depth-resolved, bio-optical data are able to qualitatively reproduce the vertical structure in NPP inferred from in situ 14C incubations at various ocean regions. At station ALOHA, float-based estimates agree within uncertainty with productivity observations at depth, but underestimate surface NPP. We test the ability of the CbPM to infer the depth-resolved structure in NPP from bio-optical properties in the mixed layer, in similar fashion as how remote sensing algorithms of ocean productivity operate. In Southern Ocean waters, the depth-reconstructing implementation of the CbPM overestimates phytoplankton division rates and Chl:C below the mixed layer, resulting in artificially high subsurface NPP when compared with the fully float-informed implementation of the model. The CbPM subsurface extrapolation of phytoplankton Chl, Chl:C division rates, and NPP improves by accounting for deep nutrient (iron) stress impacts on photoacclimation in the Southern Ocean. This improvement is also observed in vertically- integrated NPP, where the mean bias between model implementations in depth-integrated productivity south of 30◦S is reduced by 62 % when account for deep iron limitation. Our results demonstrate that profiling data from biogeochemical Argo floats can serve to inform regional adjustments that lead to the improvement of marine productivity algorithms.

NPP↗

The NASA Facility for Astromaterials Research at the Johnson Space Center – A National Laboratory for Planetary Research

The Astromaterials Research and Exploration Science (ARES) Division at the NASA Johnson Space Center has established the NASA Facility for Astromaterials Research (NFAR) through the NASA Planetary Science Enabling Facilities program. NFAR is designed to provide access to our unique combination of laboratories, instruments, infrastructure, and technical expertise for conducting broad-based world-class planetary research. NFAR enables direct access to both research and curation expertise, to facilitate specialized sample handling and analysis of astromaterials and planetary analog materials. NFAR users from institutions that historically have limited access to or lack in-house analytical or experimental facilities are particularly encouraged to apply. We award NFAR research projects to users in a competitive peer-reviewed proposal process. Proposals to use NFAR labs are limited to <5 pages and focus on the scientific purpose of the investigation and its relevance to NASA Planetary Science Division (PSD) objectives, the labs to be accessed, and the time needed for the investigation. There is no deadline for proposals, and proposals will be reviewed on a rolling basis. NASA-funded research in active PSD R&A proposals is prioritized along with requests from early-career/next-generation scientists, under-represented minorities, and to Principal Investigators from minority-serving institutions. More information on the NFAR labs and preparing and submitting a proposal can be found at: https://ares.jsc.nasa.gov/research/nasa-facility-astromaterials-research/.

E. Rampe↗

The NASA Facility for Astromaterials Research at the Johnson Space Center – A National Laboratory for Planetary Research

The Astromaterials Research and Exploration Science (ARES) Division at the NASA Johnson Space Center houses a unique combination of laboratories, instruments, infrastructure, technical expertise, and other assets for conducting broad-based world-class planetary research. These facilities have been accessed for decades by hundreds of external scientists, including faculty, post-docs, students, and interns, most at no-cost and on a collaborative basis. With funding through NASA’s Planetary Science Enabling Facilities (PSEF) program, we have established the NASA Facility for Astromaterials Research (NFAR) to expand access to and enhance these laboratories for a diverse and inclusive external user base, focusing on training of the next generation of scientists and, thus, maximizing the science return from research funded by R&A programs in NASA’s Planetary Science Division (PSD). NFAR enables new planetary sample analyses, making new scientific discoveries possible, including training the next generation of planetary scientists. NFAR laboratories are co-located with JSC Curation that houses the NASA-controlled astromaterials collections, thus enabling direct access to both research and curation expertise, to facilitate specialized sample handling and analysis of allocated samples to sample PIs, particularly those affiliated with institutions that historically have limited access to or lack in-house analytical or experimental facilities.

J. I. Simon↗

Exploring Earth's Interface with Space: The Scientific Case for a Satellite Mission to the Lower Thermosphere-Ionosphere Transition Region

The ESA-NASA Lower Thermosphere-Ionosphere Science (ENLoTIS) Working Group was formed in May 2022 to cooperatively explore future lower thermosphere-ionosphere (LTI) satellite mission concepts, targeting very low altitudes (100-200 km) with in situ sampling of relevant geophysical parameters associated with the neutral atmosphere, the ionosphere’s plasma, electromagnetic fields, and energetic particles, which, together with modeling, would enable significant advancements in the understanding of neutral-ion interactions and other related science and space weather topics in this critical region of Geospace. The LTI region has been identified as one of considerable interest to both NASA and ESA. Most recently, the Daedalus mission study was carried out under the remit of ESA’s Earth Observation Programmes (EOP) Directorate competitive Earth Explorer 10 pre-feasibility (Phase 0) activities. Furthermore, many NASA studies have also focused on the LTI region, including both directed missions with dipping spacecraft, such as the initial TIMED dual-satellites and the GEC constellation, as well as numerous highly-rated Explorer proposals targeting the LTI. Although the Daedalus mission was not selected, the ESA Advisory Committee on Earth Observation (ACEO) ranked it highly on scientific grounds and encouraged further study activities to mature the concept, exploring potential international collaboration. Subsequent bilateral discussions with NASA’s Science Mission Directorate (SMD) noted that such a concept was in alignment with the 2020 SMD science plan – Science 2020-2024: A Vision for Scientific Excellence – along with other complimentary activities within the NASA Heliophysics Division. Building on NASA’s and ESA’s long history of very successful collaborations, this mutual interest in LTI science led to the establishment of a new inter-agency and cross-discipline science connection, linking the ESA EOP Climate Action, Sustainability and Science Department and the NASA Heliophysics Division. Initial exploratory discussions led to the formation of the ENLoTIS Working Group, which was directed to explore the science case behind a potential joint LTI mission. Members of the ENLoTIS Working Group are listed below, consisting of 7 scientists from ESA Member and Cooperating States and 7 scientists from the United States. The working group held 3 “in person” meetings over the course of 18 months, interspersed with regular virtual meetings on a more frequent basis. This report constitutes their chief findings and recommendations.

thermosphere↗

NICS (NASA Instrument Capabilities Study) Instrument Schedule and Cost Study

This paper summarizes work performed on the Flight Projects Directorate Planetary Science Projects Division (PSPD, Code 430) NICS (NASA Instrument Capabilities study) instrument schedule and cost study. Included are a short summary of the original NICS (NASA, 2008), and the design and approach, data collection, analysis, preliminary findings and recommendations from select areas of the current study. The NICS (2008) was chartered by then NASA Chief Engineer Michael Ryschkewitsch and chaired by Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) engineer, John Leon. The focus was to identify problem areas in instrument development and, if possible, to offer solutions. In the area of instrument developments, the NICS (2008) identified a lack of resources and authority to successfully manage to instrument cost and schedule requirements; and a lack of critical skills, expertise, and leadership to successfully implement unique (one-of-a-kind) high technology developments (NASA, 2008, pp. 51, 52). Additionally, the NICS (2008) found problems in requirements formulation, reviews and management; unrealistic caps and overly optimistic estimates; and externally directed changes which increased the likelihood of overrunning cost and schedule (NASA, 2008, pp.53, 54). It is noteworthy that NICS findings are consistent with previous studies at the mission level (Robbins, Schmidt & White, 2020). Five years later in 2013, the Instrument Projects Division (IPD) was established to implement and manage instrument projects greater than $20M. The IPD was known as Code 490. Its structure incorporated several of the NICS (2008) recommendations. To see if these incorporated recommendations made a difference, and to identify other potential challenges in instrument developments, two parallel studies were initiated. Originally led by the IPD, now led by the PSPD, and the Instrument and Payload Systems Engineering Branch (IPSE, Code 592), respectively, the instrument schedule and cost study and the instrument technical complexity study began in 2017. Data collection was initiated in 2020 and is on-going. This paper is limited to the IPD/PSPD study. Among other findings, preliminary data indicate IPD/PSPD project management support positively influenced instrument development as related to providing a dedicated level of support staff, including a deputy Instrument Project Manager (dIPM), reducing IPM leadership changes, and providing other project support. Next steps include continued data collection and analysis, and mapping to technical complexity data.

NICS implementation↗

Trajectory Engineering with Modular Patched Conics for Entry Systems and TPS (TEMPEST)

Brief Presenter Biography (35 word limit): Bohdan Wesely is an Aerospace Engineer in the Entry Systems and Technology Division at Ames. He has worked on a variety of projects for NASA including integrated TPS (thermal protection system) flight hardware deliveries and testing services for commercial partners. Introduction: TEMPEST is a new trajectory analysis framework that is designed to fill the gap between dedicated flight mechanics tools and aerothermal and TPS sizing tools. The project started as an SJSU master’s thesis and has since evolved into a general conceptual design tool capable of studying a wide variety of entry problems. Development is ongoing in the Entry Systems and Technology Division at NASA ARC. Why TEMPEST: Space missions involving entry into a planetary atmosphere involve a series of unique requirements across multiple disciplines. Whether it is traditional entry descent and landing (EDL), or aerocapture, the vehicle must navigate to its target landing location or orbit state, and the TPS must protect the payload during entry. The design process typically involves iterative handoffs between various flight mechanics, flow solver, and material response level tools. During the early conceptual phase, a wide variety of feasible trajectories are simulated in a Monte Carlo scenario which broadly satisfy the mission or landing requirements. Next, computational fluid dynamics (CFD), direct simulation Monte Carlo (DSMC), and other flow solver analyses are performed at various key trajectory points to generate an aero-database, heating and TPS design requirements also emerge at this stage. At this point, with updated aerodynamics from the various flow solvers, trajectories can be re-run, this in turn can change the required freestream conditions for the CFD tools, and as a project progresses, these analyses converge, and uncertainty is reduced. However, there is always a “hand-off” occurring between two inherently coupled phenomena. Analysis Description: One of the goals with TEMPEST is to use a variety of first principles estimation methods coupled with an atmosphere model to predict vehicle aerothermodynamics across the entire flight regime while propagating a 3 or 6 degree of freedom (DoF) trajectory. Aerodynamics methods include modified Newtonian, Maxwell and Cercignani- Lampis-Lord (CLL) for continuum, transitional, and free molecular flow regimes. Aerothermodynamics include boundary layer and reference enthalpy methods, and Mutation++ for non-equilibrium chemistry modeling. TEMPEST is also capable of stitching multiple trajectory segments together to study mission scenarios like multi-pass aerocapture and aero-gravity assists. Most of the program is implemented in MATLAB using modern system objects, it relies on several C++ shared libraries for supporting tools like Gmsh, the Global Reference Atmospheric Model (GRAM), and Mutation++. The various first principles aerothermal estimation methods are discretized across either a structured axisymmetric panel mesh or an unstructured tri-mesh generated from an open-source tool such as Gmsh, this allows solutions on the same mesh to be compared across tools such as CB-Aero. CFD Coupling. A physics-aware, gaussian process CFD anchoring scheme is proposed to adjust the various first principles methods as a CFD database is populated. One goal for this anchoring module is to inform the project where CFD should be run. Full knowledge of the entire trajectory, atmosphere, and aerothermodynamics allows for easier identification of high sensitivity areas and uncertainty quantification. While the first principles effects are well known and proven accurate in existing tools such as CB- Aero and Cart3D, a physics aware CFD anchoring scheme increases tool credibility across a project lifecycle. Material Response Modeling. Correct TPS sizing is critical for optimizing mass for science payloads and ensuring mission success. The process typically involves a thermal analysis along the trajectory with surface heating environments as a boundary condition. Several design constraints are maximum bondline temperature and maximum recession with various margining techniques. The material response tool FIAT, developed out of NASA Ames, is currently being integrated into the TEMPEST environment. TPS recession, shape change, mass loss, and mass property alteration are all factors that can perturb an entry trajectory. For missions like Mars 2020, recession was minimal and was safely handled separately as a post process. For missions such as Jupiter Galileo with a high TPS mass fraction or asteroid entries, recession plays a major role. The proposed fully coupled scheme is to use an epoch-based approach where the trajectory integration is halted after a recession threshold, the energy balance and FIAT are solved at each panel, the mesh, aerodynamics, and mass properties are updated, and the trajectory continues. Several computational tradeoffs have been made during the development of TEMPEST to limit the cost of a single trajectory and preserve its utility as a conceptual, rapid iteration tool. Conclusion: Development of TEMPEST is ongoing and the project is still in its infancy. This talk aims to showcase its unique capabilities to support future NASA entry systems missions.

Bohdan O Wesely↗

NASA Talks: Space Shuttle Columbia - Lessons Learned: Columbia Launch and Recovery

On February 25, 2026, this NASA Talk was held regarding the Space Shuttle Columbia (Columbia Launch & Recovery). Crew & Thermal System Division (EC) partnered with Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and Engineering Directorate (EA) to bring this talk to Johnson Space Center (JSC) centering on what led up to and transpired after the Space Shuttle Columbia accident. Some recovered debris was on exhibit during the talk. Retired NASA Columbia Vehicle Manager Scott Thurston presented this talk. Mr. Thurston brings a wealth of knowledge from his mission experience. This talk was timely and a solemn reminder of the critical importance of diligence, safety, and excellence in our work. EA Director Julie Kramer White welcomed the 400+ center-wide in-person audience, and EC Division Chief Rubik Sheth introduced the speakers. This event was held in the JSC Teague Auditorium, recorded, and executed by the EC in-house STAR Productions team. This record includes an mp4 video presentation with a run time of 36 min. 20 sec.; in color; with sound.

NASA Talks↗

NASA Talks: Space Shuttle Columbia - Lessons Learned

On February 25, 2026, two NASA Talks were held regarding the Space Shuttle Columbia (Columbia Launch & Recovery, Columbia Reconstruction, Investigation, Causes & Key Takeaways). Crew & Thermal System Division (EC) partnered with Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and Engineering Directorate (EA) to bring these talks to Johnson Space Center (JSC) centering on what led up to and transpired after the Space Shuttle Columbia accident. Some recovered debris was on exhibit during the talks. NASA Mishap Program Specialist David Erickson and retired NASA Columbia Vehicle Manager Scott Thurston presented these talks. Mr. Erickson supports NASA mishap investigations and assists with the development of NASA's new Columbia Learning Center at KSC. Mr. Thurston brought a wealth of knowledge from his mission experience. These talks were timely and a solemn reminder of the critical importance of diligence, safety, and excellence in our work. EA Director Julie Kramer White welcomed the 400+ center-wide in-person audience, and EC Division Chief Rubik Sheth introduced the speakers. This event was held in the JSC Teague Auditorium, recorded, and executed by the EC in-house STAR Productions team.

Space Shuttle Columbia↗

NASA Talks: Space Shuttle Columbia - Lessons Learned: Columbia Reconstruction, Investigation, Causes and Key Takeaways

On February 25, 2026, this NASA Talk was held regarding the Space Shuttle Columbia (Columbia Launch & Recovery, Columbia Reconstruction, Investigation, Causes & Key Takeaways). Crew & Thermal System Division (EC) partnered with Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and Engineering Directorate (EA) to bring these talks to Johnson Space Center (JSC) centering on what led up to and transpired after the Space Shuttle Columbia accident. Some recovered debris was on exhibit during the talks. NASA Mishap Program Specialist David Erickson presented this talk. Mr. Erickson supports NASA mishap investigations and assists with the development of NASA's new Columbia Learning Center at KSC. This talk was timely and a solemn reminder of the critical importance of diligence, safety, and excellence in our work. EA Director Julie Kramer White welcomed the 400+ center-wide in-person audience, and EC Division Chief Rubik Sheth introduced the speakers. This event was held in the JSC Teague Auditorium, recorded, and executed by the EC in-house STAR Productions team. This record includes an mp4 video with a run time of 32 min. 31 sec.; in color; with sound.

NASA Talks↗

Engineering roles and identities in the scientific community: toward participatory justice

This paper seeks to examine the roles and identities of engineers constituting one of the fundamental, but a completely indescribable community in modern big science with particle accelerators. Large communities of accelerator and detector specialists, which replaced experimenters and instrumentalists of the middle of the last century, themselves exhibit a complex structure and are divided. However, this division is in turn grounded on the division of those whose activities focus on the phenomena of nature considered independent of human beings and those who design processes and phenomena of an artificial, technical nature. Nevertheless, in terms of their modus operandi and identity, the kinship between engineers and experimental scientists is considerable. I argue that such exclusion of the engineering community from epistemic practices can serve as an example of participatory injustice. As one of the ways to transcend participatory injustice, I suggest that the communities should be encouraged to work together in epistemically tantamount roles while structural hindrances to the mobility between communities need to be alleviated.

Pronskikh, V.↗

Mechanical Properties of Aged A709

A709 plate is in the process of being developed and qualified through a collaboration by Argonne National Laboratory (ANL), Idaho National Laboratory (INL), and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). The goal is to qualify A709 plate in Section III, Division 5 of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (BPVC). This would permit the construction of A709 plate for fast-reactor structural applications. A tradeoff between creep and creep-fatigue properties was established in prior work. A processing route was identified as providing the optimal balance between creep-rupture and elevated-temperature cyclic properties for the solution annealed condition. This condition, however, resulted in a shorter than desired creep-rupture life. Aging is probed to evaluate its potential at further improving mechanical properties. Aging statically precipitates the solutes in solution prior to service. The processing routes identified as providing the best creep-rupture properties and best balance in mechanical properties are investigated. This report discloses the results from tensile, creep, and elevated-temperature cyclic testing performed at INL on the aged material. The aged properties are compared to solution annealed properties. A709 offers improvement in performance compared to 316H particularly at high temperatures; 316H is a material qualified in Section III, Division 5 of the ASME BPVC. For certain high-temperature fast-reactor design conditions, 316H cannot be used while A709 can.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗