SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “identifiability”

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 1,027 records · Page 57

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Transmission Electron Microscopy Study of a Refractory Metal Grain from a Calcium-Aluminum-Rich Inclusion in the Leoville CV3 Chondrite

Introduction: Calcium-aluminum-rich inclusions (CAIs) are an important component of chondritic meteorites. They can contain materials that are thermodynamically predicted and isotopically age dated to be among the first-formed solids in our solar system [1-5]. Observed in some CAIs are micron to sub-micron sized inclusions rich in Fe, Ni, and high-Z elements such as Pt, Os, Ir and W, in the form of refractory metal nuggets (RMNs), fremdlinges, and ‘nugget like objects’ (NLOs) [1,6]. Refractory siderophile elements such as Os, Ir and Ru are thermodynamically predicted to condense at temperatures well in excess of the major CAI phases such as melilite, perovskite, spinel and hibonite [2,7-9]. These refractory metal inclusions in CAIs can therefore serve as probes into the thermodynamic landscape of the early solar protoplanetary disk. Here we report on a refractory grain identified in a CAI of the Leoville CV3 chondrite. This work is part of an ongoing effort to gain insight into the thermochemistry of the early solar system through systematic analyses of the structure and chemistry of various components in CAIs [10-13]. Sample and Analytical Techniques: A fluffy type A CAI (Fig. 1A) was identified in a section of the Leoville, CV3 chondrite (Center for Meteorite Studies, Arizona State University collection, #821_C_3) using a JOEL-JXA 8530F electron microprobe at Arizona State University. Backscattered electron (BSE) imaging and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) were used to identify refractory metal grains in the CAI using a Thermo Fisher (formerly FEI) Helios NanoLab 660 G3 focused-ion-beam scanning-electron microscope (FIBSEM) located at the Kuiper Materials Imaging and Characterization Facility (KMICF) at the Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, University of Arizona. The FIB is equipped with an EDAX EDS system. We selected one of the larger (micron-sized) refractory metal grains, designated as ‘Spud’ (Fig. 1B) for further analysis. ‘Spud’ was extracted and thinned to electron transparency (<100 nm) using the FIB-SEM located in KMICF, following methods described by [14- 15]. The FIB section was analyzed using a 200 keV Hitachi HF5000 scanning transmission electron microscope (S/TEM) located at KMICF. The HF5000 is equipped with cold-field emission gun, 3rd-order spherical aberration corrector for STEM imaging, and an Oxford Instruments X-Max N 100 TLE energydispersive spectroscopy (EDS) system with dual 100 mm2 windowless silicon-drift detectors (Ω = 2.0 sr). Selected-area electron-diffraction (SAED) patterns were acquired to aid in determination of crystallinity and phase. Results: The mineralogy, texture, and morphology of the CAI are consistent with that of a fluffy type A (FTA) CAI [16]. BSE imaging at high magnifications revealed grains with high contrast, indicative of compositions rich in elements of higher atomic number relative to surrounding material. These high-Z grains have sizes that range from ∼250 nm to 4 µm. EDS analyses confirm that the bright grains are metal-rich inclusions. A minor fraction of the grains are composed of only Fe and Ni, but the majority (∼60%) of the identified inclusions also contained various refractory siderophiles including Os, Ru, Zr, Ir and Mo. EDS analysis on the FIB-SEM of Spud shows that it contains Fe, Ni, Mo and Ru. High-angle annular dark-field (HAAFD) imaging and EDS mapping in the TEM (Fig. 2) show that Spud occurs in melilite (Ca1.9Al1.99Si1.06O7). Spud contains a subhedral to anhedral morphology and is compositionally heterogenous (polyphasic, Fig. 2). Local spatial correlation occurs among Fe, Ni, and Pt, and also among Os, Ru, and Mo. SAED patterns show that the Fe-Ni-Pt, Fe-Os-Mo-Ru and Fe-Pt regions are crystalline. Discussion: CAIs can contain various types of inclusions rich in Fe, Ni and refractory siderophiles such as Os, Ru, W and Pt [1]. RMNs are micron-sized, single phase alloy grains and can contain Os, Ir, Ru and Rh [1,7,17]. NLOs are also micron-sized inclusions, but contain two phases, a refractory metal, and an oxide [6]. Fremdlinge are the largest of such inclusions (tens of microns in size) and are complex aggregates of Fe-Ni alloy, silicates, oxides, and sulfides [1,17]. While the size of Spud matches previous descriptions of RMNs and NLOs, Spud is neither a single-phase alloy like RMNs, nor does it contain one metal phase and one oxide like NLOs. Spud does not match the above described categories of refractory metal inclusions. The presence of refractory siderophiles such as Mo, Os, Ru, and Pt suggests a high-temperature origin. Thermodynamic modelling by [7] indicates condensation temperatures of 1917 K, 1693 K, 1613 K and 1415 K for Os, Mo, Ru and Pt respectively. These models also show that following the initial condensation of a refractory metal, alloying of solutes such as Fe, Ni and W, occurs in levels proportional to their partial pressures in the surrounding gas. Such alloying occurs at temperatures above the condensation temperatures of common CAI phases such as melilite (1529 K), perovskite (1441 K), spinel (197 K) and forsterite (1354 K) [2]. The polyphasic nature of Spud could be the result of such high-temperature alloying, possibly shortly after the condensation of Mo and Ru at 1693 K and 1613 K respectively. That Spud occurs as an inclusion is consistent with it having formed prior to and at temperature above that of its host melilite in this FTA CAI, which is qualitatively consistent with such prior thermodynamic modeling. Further, the polyphasic nature of Spud is similar to refractory grains from a FTA CAI in the Northwest Africa (NWA) 8323, CV3 chondrite [11-13]. These data suggest that such refractory metal grains could have been widespread in the inner and early solar protoplanetary disk and represent some of the earliest formed solids to have condensed. Acknowledgments: Research and instrumentation supported by NASA grants #NNX12AL47G, #NNX15AJ22G and #80NSSC19K0509, and NSF grants #1531243 and #0619599. Fig 2. STEM data on ‘Spud’. HAADF Image (Top) False-color EDS Maps (Bottom) References: [1] MacPherson G. J. (2014) T. of Geochem. Vol I: Met. And Cosmochem. Processes, 139-179. [2] Lodders K. (2003) ApJ, 591, 1220-1247. [3] Ebel D. S. (2006) Met. & the Early S. Sys. II., 253- 277. [4] Amelin Y. (2002) Science, 297, 1678-1683. [5] Connelly J.N. et.al. (2012) Science, 338, 651-655. [6] Schwander D. et al. (2015) GCA, 18, 70-87. [7] Palme H. and Wlotzka F. (1976) EPSL, 33, 45-60. [8] Berg T. et al. (2009) ApJ, 702, 172-176. [9] Liffman K. et al. (2021) Icarus, 221, 89-105. [10] Zega T.J. et al. (2021) PSJ, 2, 115. [11] Ramprasad T. et al. (2020) LPSC LI, Abstract #2472. [12] Ramprasad T. et al. (2021) Microscopy & Microanalysis, S1, 2792-2794. [13] Ramprasad T. et al. (2021) 84th MetSoc, Abstract #6123. [14] Zega T.J. et al. (2007) MAPS, 42, 1373-1386. [15] Ramprasad T. et al. (2022) MAPS, in revision. [16] Grossman L. (1975), GCA, 39, 433-454. [17] El Goresy A. et al. (1978) LPSC IX, Abstract#1100

T. Ramprasad↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

SHERLOC: Results of the first 350 sols of operations

On February 18th 2021, the Perseverance rover landed in Jezero crater, Mars. This site was chosen because orbiter data analysis provides evidence that the crater hosted a stream-fed lake during the Martian Noachian period. The Octavia Butler landing site is located ~1.9 km east of the remnants of a river delta. Deltaic and lacustrine sediments can preserve biosignatures, making Jezero crater a prime target for Mars sample return science. One of the seven instruments on Perseverance’s science payload is SHERLOC –Scanning Habitable Environments with Raman and Luminescence for Organics and Chemicals. SHERLOC combines fluorescence and Raman spectroscopy with microscopic imaging to analyze surface material to better understand the history of the aqueous environments recorded in the rocks of Jezero crater and to search for potential biosignatures. SHERLOC imaging obtains high spatial resolution images of geological targets to identify grain-scale structure and texture. SHERLOC spectroscopy enables high-sensitivity detection, characterization, and spatially resolved correlation of trace organic materials. Native fluorescence emissions from aromatic organic species allow for detection and classification of aromatic organic molecules, whereas Raman scattered photons from molecules allow identification of functional groups of organics, chemicals, and minerals. In the first 300 sols, SHERLOC has analyzed 3 natural surfaces, and 5 abraded rock patches created during the Crater Floor Campaign within Jezero crater. SHERLOC has been able to identify phosphates, amorphous/microcrystalline silicate (AMS), olivine, sulfates, and carbonates in abraded patches in the green zone campaign within Jezero Crater Máaz and Séítah formations. Within these detections we have begun to tell the story of what this crater was like when it was full of liquid water over 3 billion years ago. In each of these samples we have identified fluorescence features that are likely aromatic organics native to the rock interiors. We have identified multiple unique fluorescence signatures, within each of the abraded patches. The organic signatures have either been widely distributed over an extended area, which is probably due to planetary wide dust, or have spatially resolved locations that are collocated with different mineral signatures. Note: Additional information available on attachment.

L. W. Beegle↗

NASA NTRS2021

Geospatial Cluster Analysis of the State, Duration and Severity of Drought Over Paraíba State, Northeastern Brazil

Droughts threaten water resources, agriculture, socio-economic activities and the population at the global and regional level, so identifying areas with homogeneous drought behaviors is an important consideration in improving the management of water resources. The objective of this study is to identify homogenous zones over Paraíba State in relation to the state, duration and severity of droughts that have occurred over the last 20 years (1998–2017) using hierarchical cluster analysis based on both gauge-measured and Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) estimated rainfall data (TMPA 3B42). The drought series were calculated using the Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI) based on eight time scales and were grouped according to drought state, duration and severity time series. The integrated results of state, duration and severity of droughts indicate that there is a basis for dividing Paraíba State into two major regions (a) Zone I, formed by Mata Paraibana and Agreste Paraibano, and (b) Zone II, composed by Borborema and Sertão Paraibano. This division is evident when assessing short-term droughts, but in the case of long-term droughts, Paraíba State has a high similarity in terms of drought state, duration, and severity. Factors such as proximity to the ocean, active climatic systems, and the local relief configuration were identified as influencing the drought regime. Finally, it is concluded that TMPA rainfall estimates represent a valuable source of data to regionalize and identify drought patterns over this part of Brazil and that other studies of this type should be carried out to monitor these phenomena based on other satellite-based rainfall data, including the Global Precipitation Mission (GPM).

SPI↗

NASA NTRS2021

NASA's Surface Deformation and Change Mission Study

The National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine 2017 Decadal Survey of Earth Science and Applications identified geodetic measurements of surface deformation and related change as one of the top five "observables" to be prioritized in NASA's program going forward. In response, NASA commissioned a multi-center Surface Deformation and Change (SDC) team to perform a five year study of mission architectures that would support SDC observables and provide the most value to the diverse science and applications communities it serves. The study is being conducted in phases, in which the science and applications capabilities identified in the Decadal Survey are interpreted and refined, candidate mission architectures and associated technologies to support these needs are identified, architectures are assessed against a science value framework specific to SDC, and recommendations to NASA are made. Ultimately, NASA will decide which amongst these recommendations will proceed to mission formulation. As synthetic aperture radar (SAR) was identified as the prime sensor technology to satisfy SDC observational needs, a key component of the SDC study is to assess the current state of the art in SAR sensor and spacecraft systems and components. The number of SAR systems, both civil and commercial, is growing rapidly, requiring that mission architectures not only consider technology, but availability of data from other missions, possible partnerships or collaborations, and even data purchase. The mechanism for assessment involves development of an end-to-end science performance evaluation tool for multi-satellite constellations, which feeds into a science value framework that considers science performance, technological programmatic risks, and cost. This paper will present an overview of the ongoing study including the architectures under consideration and the technology road map needed to achieve the objectives of the mission.

Rosen, Paul↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Overview of NASA ISRU Plans, Priorites, and Activities

Introduction:The National Aeronautics andSpace Administration (NASA) of the United States ofAmerica (US) has initiated the Artemis Moon to Marsprogram to send astronauts (the first woman andperson of color) back to the lunar surface, create asustainable human lunar exploration program, andlead the first human exploration mission to the Marssurface in the 2030’s [1]. A major objective of thisprogram is to characterize the resources that exist onthe Moon and Mars, and learn how to utilize them forsustained and affordable exploration. Commonlyknown as In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU), thesearch for, acquisition, and processing of resources inspace has the potential to greatly reduce thedependency on transporting mission consumables andinfrastructure from Earth, thereby reducing missioncosts, risks, and dependency on Earth.ISRU is Enabling: Through the extraction andprocessing of resources into mission commoditiessuch as rocket propellants, life support consumables,and fuel cell reactants, ISRU enhances and evolvesthe cis-lunar, lander, and surface transportationsystems required for human exploration; expandingand enhancing HOW humans can explore and returnfrom the Moon. Through the extraction andprocessing of resources into metals, silicon, and othermanufacturing and construction feedstock, ISRUenhances and allows for the expansion of criticalinfrastructure using in situ manufacturing andconstruction capabilities that influence WHAT humanscan do on the Moon and in cis-lunar space. Becauseof this, ISRU supports and enables commercialinvolvement beyond NASA and governmentalagencies by both lowering the cost of sustainedtransportation to/from/on the Moon as well assupporting the market required for needing thesetransportation systems. Strategic Framework:To achieve this vision,NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate(STMD) ensures the coordinated development ofISRU and other critical space and surfaceinfrastructure elements such as propulsion, power,manufacturing, construction, and robotics through theStrategic Technology Architecture Roundtable(STAR) process. Through STAR, an integratedframework and process has been created allowing forcapabilities and technologies to be linked andassessed, gaps to be identified, specifications andmetrics to be established, and provide a means toprioritize and implement technology development andmissions. A critical part of the STAR effort has beenthe establishment of the Strategic Framework thatorganizes all work under four major Thrusts (Go,Land, Live, and Explore) and identifies the drivingOutcomes for each of these Thrusts. From the Thrustsand Outcomes, all work can be categorized and linkedbetween Capability Areas, and Technology Gaps canbe identified and addressed (Figure 1.)Figure 1. Strategic Framework and STAR FrameworkISRU Envisioned Future: To drive thedevelopment of technologies and capabilities, theSTAR process starts with establishing a ‘grand vision’of where each Outcome and Capability is aiming tobe considered complete. For ISRU, the EnvisionedFuture is “Scalable ISRU production/utilizationcapabilities including sustainable commodities on thelunar and Mars Surface”. This involves starting with10’s of metric tons of products, but evolves into 100’sto 1000’s of metric tons of water, oxygen, propellants,construction and manufacturing feedstock, andcommodities for habitat and food production andoperations. For ISRU, the ‘Prospect to Product’philosophy starts with Destination Reconnaissance &Resource Assessment, followed by ResourceAcquisition, Isolation, and Preparation, leading intoResource Processing (which is further subdivided intomission consumables and feedstocks for constructionand manufacturing). The ISRU Envisioned Futurealso considers what resources are available andattempts to address what and when these resourceswill be evaluated and harnessed, as well asconsidering which products/commodities can beobtained for early use and which ones require moretime and/or users of refined products.It Takes an Architecture: ISRU does not existon its own. By definition, it requires customers/users SHORT TITLE HERE: A. B. Author and C. D. Authorto use the products/commodities produced by ISRUsystems. Also, for an ISRU capability to exist, itmust obtain products and services from other systemsand infrastructure. An important aspect of the STARprocess and the ISRU Envisioned Futures Prioritiesstrategy is to identify and link all of these systems andcapabilities to achieve the desired end state (Figure2).Figure 2. ISRU as Part of a Larger ArchitectureISRU Capability Drivers: The guidingprinciples for NASA’s Space TechnologyDevelopment for Artemis are to develop criticaltechnologies and capabilities that enable (i) asustainable Lunar surface presence, (ii) the future goalof sending humans to Mars, and (iii) promotingcritical technologies to enable future science andcommercial missions. It is a major goal of theArtemis campaign to establish some sort of base campat the lunar South Pole by approximately the end ofthe decade. The ISRU Envisioned Futures Prioritiesstrategy is aligned with the Artemis campaign todevelop and demonstrate ISRU capabilities in thistimeframe that could lead to sustained surfaceoperations, infrastructure growth, and commercialoperations in the next decade (Figure 3).Figure 3. ISRU Dual Path to Full Implementation and CommercializationState of the Art and Gaps: To achieve theenvisioned future, an extensive effort was performedto understand the State of the Art (SOA) for ISRUgoing back decades, and to assess the SOA against thenear and long-term goals and objectives of the ISRUStrategic Outcome objectives. While the releasedISRU Envisioned Futures Priorities only includes atop-level definition of both the SOA and Gaps, furtherinformation on these for ISRU can be found in theISRU Gap Assessment Study performed for theInternational Space Exploration Coordination Group(ISECG) [2]. To provide further guidance to industryand academia, a top level assessment was performedand provide that divides critical areas of ISRUcapabilities and technologies into 3 categories:Significant Funding, Partially Covered/MoreRequired, and Limited/No Funded Activities.Envisioned Future Priorities- Next Steps forISRU: While a significant amount of work over abroad range of technology areas has been performedover the last several years for lunar ISRU, to reach theenvisioned future for ISRU, a lot more work isrequired at the technology level leading to bothsystems and technology demonstrations in the nearfuture. To guide investments within NASA, industry,and academia, 5 specific areas of high priority wereidentified. These are:1.Complete development of the Water and Oxygen Mining Paths and close technology gaps, with emphasis on oxygen extraction from Highland regolith and parallel paths for polar water mining.2.Expand development of metal extraction and feedstock for manufacturing and construction, with emphasis on aluminum and initial/easy to obtain/make construction feedstocks leading to more refined metals and other regolith resources. Also, evaluate biologically inspired/derived technologies in bio-mining, bio-plastic, and other feedstock commodities.3.Ensure the resource assessment needed for future ISRU commercial operations is coordinated with both near/long-term science objectives as well as Artemis mission locations of interest.4.Initiate NASA and industry-led system-level analyses, integration, and testing activities for ISRU capabilities. While significant work has been performed at the technology and subsystemlevel, it is now important to understand how these technology investments can be leveraged and utilized in actual systems and applications5.Initiate lunar ISRU technology flight demonstrations leading to initial ‘Pilot Plant’ end-to-end production capability demonstrations, led by industry

ISRU↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Uncovering Hazards Using a Multi-Objective Optimization to Explore the Faulty State-Space

Considering resilience when designing complex engineered systems is crucial to ensure the system is safe under unexpected hazardous scenarios. Traditional risk-based approaches, such as Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) are useful for designing the system to mitigate hazardous scenarios that can be identified by the designer, but often require experience or prior knowledge of system failures to generate. More recently, researchers have developed simulation tools that enable the designer to model large sets of hazardous scenarios (driven by both internal faults and external factors) through simulation. While these tools enable a wider scope of fault modes to be evaluated (e.g., by injecting combined set of fault modes or injecting modes at different times), the resulting assessments (like FMEA) still require knowledge of the specific modes to be evaluated. However, failure to analyze a wide variety of fault scenarios can lead to an incomplete picture of the system resilience, especially to "surprise events'' which may be difficult for the designer to identify and predict beforehand. To overcome this challenge, previous work developed a fault sampling approach for resilience simulations which would procedurally-generate a wide variety of potential faults by systematically perturbing the health states of the system. While the resulting fault modes generated covered a much larger space hazards than would be otherwise considered (and identified many unique failure trajectories which would not have otherwise been identified), it also significantly increased the computational cost of the analysis and resulted in the simulation and analysis of a large set of essentially duplicate scenarios. Additionally, as the number of dimensions in the faulty state-space increases, the full elaboration of possible modes becomes computationally infeasible, justifying the use of a more targeted search. To resolve this limitation, this work proposes the use of a multiobjective optimization algorithm to search the health state space for potential fault modes that are both (1) hazardous and (2) unique. To solve this type of problem, this work proposes the use of a cooperative co-evolutionary algorithm. To demonstrate this approach, it will be applied to a model of an autonomous rover which uses line markings to navigate, focusing on potential hazards in the drive system which could cause the rover to crash. To determine the merit of the approach, it will further be compared with the previously-presented range elaboration approach and a random mode generation approach on the basis of computational efficiency and found modes.

Resilience↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Visualizing Corridors in Terminal Airspace using Trajectory Clustering

Context: Advances in battery and automation technology have made routine air taxi and cargo transport in urban areas a business model that can be attained by emerging aviation innovators. The community vision and work to enable these novel operations is discussed using the term ‘Urban Air Mobility’ or UAM. Small, piloted, airspace vehicles that fly with a few passengers do operate in urban areas today, and these vehicles can be studied as an early proxy for this future UAM traffic. Aim: We seek to identify corridors already in daily operation and their properties. Method: We applied DBSCAN and HDBSCAN to Dallas Forth-Worth TRACON flight data to identify corridors in use, their density, and devised a method to annotate landing sites used in these corridors with site metadata. Results: While DBSCAN was unable to group similar trajectories, we we were able to successfully identify corridors using HDBSCAN, measure their density and annotate them. Conclusion: The applied method can successfully identify corridors in daily operation with additional metadata to help domain expert understand the intent of UAM corridors.

UAM, Trajectory, TRACON, Clustering, DBSCAN, HDBSC↗

NASA NTRS2022

Phase II and III Solid Waste Management Unit Assessment and Confirmatory Sampling Report for Per- and Polyfluorinated Alkyl Substances, Potential Release Location 237, Kennedy Space Center, Florida

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) Phase II and III Solid Waste Management Unit (SWMU) Assessment (SA) and Confirmatory Sampling (CS) were conducted at the John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Potential Release Location (PRL) 237, located in Merritt Island, Brevard County, Florida for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) under Contract 80KSC019D0010/80KSC019F0289. A Phase I SA and CS Report was previously submitted that identified 33 locations of concern (LOCs) at KSC associated with the storage, use, or release of materials containing PFAS. The objectives of the Phase II and III SA and CS were to: - Complete site and source characterization of identified LOCs; - Identify areas of potential concern (AOPCs) where past or present activities may have resulted in a release of PFAS to the environment; - Qualitatively characterize migration potential of released PFAS to environmental media (primarily soil, groundwater, surface water, and sediment); and - Identify potential receptors for exposure to PFAS-impacted environmental media. Surface water samples were collected from LOCs/AOPCs and locations on the KSC periphery during PFAS CS Phases I, II and III. Including duplicate samples, 143 environmental samples were analyzed for 14 PFAS compounds and 104 environmental samples were analyzed for 18 PFAS compounds. Ten of the analytes on the 14 compound list were detected at least once in surface water at KSC, with a wide range in magnitude of detections. The State of Florida has surface water screening levels (SWSLs) for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) in surface water, both for human and ecological receptors. The human health screening levels are lower than the ecological ones and are used in this report. PFOA was not detected in surface water at concentrations exceeding the SWSL at any LOC or Area of Potential Concern (AOPC). PFOS was detected in surface water at concentrations exceeding the SWSL at 28 LOCs/AOPCs, plus 42 locations on the KSC periphery. The data suggest a wide distribution of PFAS, particularly PFOS, in surface water but the sources of surface water contamination are not yet adequately understood. Sediment samples were collected during Phases II and III but not Phase I. Including duplicate samples, 104 environmental samples were analyzed for 14 PFAS compounds and 10 environmental samples were analyzed for 18 PFAS compounds. Twelve compounds were detected in sediment at KSC, with a wide range in magnitude of detections. There are currently no screening levels or cleanup target levels (CTLs) for sediment. The need to delineate and further characterize PFAS in sediment will be evaluated for those sites that move forward into Site Assessment. Groundwater samples were collected via DPT from LOCs/AOPCs and locations on the KSC periphery during PFAS CS Phases I, II and III. Including duplicate samples, 812 environmental DPT groundwater samples were analyzed for 14 PFAS compounds and 247 environmental samples were analyzed for 18 PFAS compounds. Twelve of the 14 compounds were detected in groundwater at KSC, with a wide range in magnitude of detections. The State of Florida has provisional groundwater cleanup target levels (GCTLs) for PFOA, PFOS and the additive concentration of PFOA+PFOS. PFOA was detected in groundwater at concentrations exceeding its provisional GCTL at 16 LOCs/AOPCs, with no exceedances on the KSC periphery. PFOS was detected in groundwater at concentrations exceeding its provisional GCTL at 30 LOCs/AOPCs, plus two locations on the KSC periphery. PFOA+PFOS was detected in groundwater at concentrations exceeding the provisional GCTL at 31 LOCs/AOPCs, plus two locations on the KSC periphery. Soil samples were collected during Phases II and III but not Phase I. Including duplicate samples, 292 environmental samples were analyzed for 14 PFAS compounds and 80 environmental samples were analyzed for 18 PFAS compounds. Fourteen compounds were detected in soil at KSC, with a wide range in magnitude of detections. The State of Florida has provisional soil cleanup target levels (SCTLs) for PFOA and PFOS. There were no PFOA results above its provisional SCTL. There was one LOC with a result above the provisional SCTL for residential settings. Recommendations are presented for each LOC and AOPC.

PFAS↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Rotational Spectroscopy is SubLIME: Site-Specific Identification of Compounds Formed on UV-photolyzed Cosmcs Ice

A variety of organic compounds has been detected in comets, meteorites, and the cold gas enveloping infant stars. These compounds display a range of complexity and include so-called complex organic molecules that may have astrobiological implications. Laboratory studies of photolyzed and nonirradiated interstellar, planetary, and cometary ices have demonstrated many astrochemical formation routes and require sensitive analytical techniques to identify the composition of ice and gas products formed. The unique identification of organics can be challenging and often requires structure-specific techniques to identify structural isomers, conformers, and isotopologues. We present the approaches used in SubLIME, the Sublimation of Laboratory Ices Millimeter/submillimeter Experiment, which uses the structure-specificity of rotational spectroscopy to identify the composition and abundances of sublimated products of UV-photolyzed ice samples. Ices are formed and photolyzed at low temperature (~10 K) and slowly heated to 300 K to sublimate the volatile products. The gas mixture is then investigated with millimeter/submillimeter spectroscopy, and the resulting spectra compared to observational spectra collected with submillimeter/far-IR telescopes. We present the experimental set-up and results of UV-photolyzed interstellar ice analogues containing water (H O) and carbon monoxide (CO). Formation routes for identified molecules are proposed for follow-up experimental and theoretical investigations.

Olivia H. Wilkins↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Using Earth Observations to Map Bull Kelp in the Puget Sound, Washington, to Support Conservation and Restoration

Bull kelp (Nereocystis luetkeana) is a critical component of nearshore ecosystems in the Puget Sound region of the Salish Sea. The Port of Seattle and Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) have identified possible declines in bull kelp extent and changes in its distribution throughout the Central Puget Sound near Seattle, Washington. Bull kelp losses threaten critical ecological services and marine habitat, as well as important cultural resources. However, these changes are not well tracked or understood due to the expensive and time-intensive nature of traditional kelp canopy monitoring methods. The Port of Seattle and Washington DNR partnered with the NASA DEVELOP team to explore the feasibility of using Earth observations between 2016 and 2021 obtained from Landsat 8 Operational Land Imager (OLI) and Sentinel-2 MultiSpectral Instrument (MSI) as a potential tool to monitor and map bull kelp. Our team identified a variety of challenges that need to be addressed before this approach can be utilized as an effective means for identifying or mapping nearshore urban kelp beds. We found that neither Sentinel-2 nor Landsat 8 significantly differentiates between kelp and no-known kelp using the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) or Normalized Difference Red-Edge Blue (NDREB). While the tidal and current filtering methods discussed here may be beneficial for identifying promising single image dates for kelp classification, the filters we used reduced the number of images each year to the point that modeling or mapping yearly kelp extent or creating time series of kelp did not appear to be feasible.

Mike Hitchner↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Visualizing Corridors in Terminal Airspace Using Trajectory Clustering

UAM Trajectory, TRACON, Clustering, DBSCAN, HDBSCA↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Detecting and Characterizing Patterns of Failure in Complex Engineered Systems: an Ontology Development and Clustering Approach

While the causes of failures in complex engineered systems are often clear in hindsight, it can be challenging to predict failures proactively during the design of novel engineered products or systems. Identifying patterns can be useful for capturing common characteristics that may lead to failure. In this paper, we present a methodology for identifying patterns of failure from NASA’s publicly available Lessons Learned Information System (LLIS). We apply an ontology development and clustering approach to identify representative patterns leading to failures in historical lessons learned. A joint inductive-deductive approach reveals the key themes in lessons that lead to failure, which are formalized and recorded as an ontology of complex systems failure causes. Documents from the LLIS are manually tagged with relevant characteristics from the ontology. From the tagged set, clustering is used to capture co-occurring sets of characteristics that lead to failure. The primary contribution of this work is a method for extracting a set of generic failure patterns in complex engineered systems and characteristics for these patterns that can be identified at design time, knowledge of which can be used to plan mitigation strategies.

Systems Engineering↗

NASA NTRS2022

Supporting Hazard Analysis for Wildfire Response Using fmdtools and MIKA

The System Wide Safety (SWS) Safety Demonstrator (SD) Series drives development of an increasingly capable In-Time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS) focusing on humanitarian applications, starting with wildfire response (SD-1). The goals of this report are to (1) provide an early hazard analysis and mitigation evaluation of wildfire response to support these efforts and (2) provide a demonstration of capabilities of the Fault Model Design Tools (fmdtools) and Manager for Intelligent Knowledge Access (MIKA) tools. fmdtools provides a modeling, simulation, and resiliency analysis framework in which a wildfire response model, the System Modeling and Analysis of Resiliency in Scalable Traffic Management for Emergency Response Operations (SMARt-STEReO), is built. MIKA is an intelligent knowledge manager with several capabilities, including assisting in hazard analysis by extracting and analyzing hazards from historical incident reports. The following topics are covered in the report: Understanding Wildfire Hazard Dynamics. We provide a description and simulated examples of how hazards occur in the SMARt-STEReO model of wildfire response and their effect on its outcome. This provides a common mental model and focuses the analysis presented in the remainder of the report. Wildfire Hazard Identification. MIKA identifies wildfire hazards from three relevant datasets: the ICS-209-PLUS, SAFECOM, and SAFENET. Hazards are manually organized into a taxonomy and MIKA analyzes each hazard’s effects, likelihood, severity, and risk. Evaluating Mitigation Strategies. The SMARt-STEReO wildfire response model built in fmdtools evaluates a subset of identified hazards. Specifically, we simulate the effect of communications faults and equipment faults on operator safety, the effect of changing winds and flammability, and a scenario with multiple ignition points and heavy smoke. Tool Limitations and Usage Considerations. We provide a discussion of appropriate tool use cases as well as limitations and considerations for usage. The tool findings are used to synthesize recommendations for wildfire response operations, which can be captured as part of an IASMS. Key recommendations are as follows: Hazards are identified from a broad spectrum of sources including aircraft subsystems, operational sources, and ground crew operations. Highest risk operational environment hazards identified are Evacuations. The highest risk manned aerial operations hazard categorized is Jumper Operations Mishap. Ground crew hazards that are highest risk are Burns, Cargo Operations Overhead, Dehydration, Entrapment, Falling Objects, Heart Attacks, Heat Exhaustion, Inadequate Training or Certification, Vehicle Breakdown, and Vehicle Collision. Modelled containment failures arise from a mismatch between the difficulty of the firefighting scenario and the capacity (e.g., speed, effectiveness, awareness) of the response. In firefighting scenarios where containment is possible (e.g., because the fire does not spread too quickly), these mismatches can occur because of a change in environmental conditions (e.g., wind, flammability, etc) or because of planning, equipment, or communications faults. Improvements to communications increase the capacity of the firefighting response by reducing the time needed to respond to the fire. While surveillance does not increase this capacity by itself, it increases operator safety by increasing state awareness, enabling firefighters to evade approaching fires. Increasing both has a synergistic effect. In general, these performance and resilience increases generalize over fault scenarios as well as unforeseen changes to circumstances (i.e., wind, aridity, etc.). However, these improvements need to be designed so as not to make the system prone to persistent large-scale communications outages, which can reduce performance.

Hazard analysis↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of the Suited Injury Modes and Effects Analysis for Identification of Top Injury Risks in Lunar Missions and Training

A new Exploration Extravehicular Activity Suit (xEVAS) is being designed to replace the current Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA’s) Artemis program to return astronauts to the lunar surface. This new suit will allow for increased range of motion compared the current EMU and Apollo era suits and will have additional features that will enhance the health and safety of exploration. With the design of lunar missions and the xEVAS progressing, it is important to consider possible injuries and injury mechanisms that could occur in the suit. To address these concerns, the suited Injury Modes and Effects Analysis (IMEA) was developed to outline suited injury scenarios and rank them based on risk score. The IMEA documents possible scenarios and underlying mechanisms of injury while wearing an extravehicular activity (EVA) suit. Tasks during lunar surface EVA as well as training events to prepare for lunar missions were considered as history has shown that more suit injuries occur during training than in flight. Each scenario is ranked with a consequence and likelihood scoring based on our current understanding of the suit and Artemis design reference missions to identify high-risk cases that will drive further work in suited injury. Injuries, mechanisms of injury, and mitigation strategies are evaluated within each scenario. The Suited Injury Summit was held on January 5, 2022, to vet the IMEA with external experts. This was an all-day virtual meeting with the suited injury team, ergonomists, suit engineers, safety engineers, the flight operations directorate, flight doctors, astronauts, astronaut strength, conditioning, and rehabilitation specialists (ASCRS), and external subject matter experts (SMEs). External SMEs consisted of surgeons with varying specialties. The intent of this meeting was to walk through the top injury risks identified in the analysis, identify any gaps that were not captured, and discuss mitigations. With participation from all groups, countless lessons-learned came from the Summit meeting. Using the lessons-learned and discussion from the Summit, the top 10 risks have been identified: neutral buoyancy laboratory training, hand/glove injuries, poor suit fit, field training, specific EVA tasks/design of task, boots/ankle injuries, falls from heights, background radiation, repetitive contact, and ambulation/long-distance ambulation. Mitigation steps have also been determined for each of the top risks. The IMEA and documentation of top risks is a living document. Yearly meetings are planned to update the analysis and reevaluate top risks and mitigations. The IMEA is being used to drive work in suited injury, and this work will continue to evolve with IMEA and lunar mission updates.

Teresa Reiber↗

NASA NTRS2022

National Campaign (NC)-1 Strategic Conflict Management Simulation (X4) Community Based Rules

Projected demand for transportation services in the urban environment has led to the development of several Concepts of Operation for Urban Air Mobility, or UAM. UAM is a concept for the transportation of people and goods in the metropolitan environment using small, efficient aircraft over short distances as part of an expanding multimodal transportation network. UAM will leverage emerging technologies including electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) aircraft, increasing levels of automation and a new operational paradigm in dense airspace where a set of agreed-upon rules govern the procedures and interactions defining a cooperative environment in which operators are entrusted with a range of functions typically conducted by Air Traffic Control (ATC). These rules, proposed in the FAA NextGen Office’s UAM Concept of Operations [1], were originally termed Community Based Rules or Community Business Rules (CBRs), and will in the future termed Cooperative Operating Practices (COPs); this document uses the original term, CBR. CBRs are a set of rules, developed by the UAM community and (where necessary) approved by the FAA that govern the interactions between UAM entities and limit the need for ATC services including, but not limited to, separation control by ATC, addressing a fundamental challenge to scaling UAM operations. UAM community development of CBRs is anticipated to accelerate the adoption of new practices while retaining the regulatory authority of the FAA within required domains (e.g., NAS safety, security and equal access). However, there currently exists no agreed industry forum or defined procedures for CBR development. Investigation of best practices for the development of UAM CBRs was identified by NASA and the FAA NextGen Office as a research need. In collaboration with seven industry partners, NASA participated in a series of simulations that investigated elements of the envisioned UAM operations, with a primary focus on Strategic Conflict Management (SCM). The development and conduct of cooperative UAM simulations with seven industry partners provided a unique opportunity to investigate CBR development practices. Development of CBRs for the UAM SCM simulations was conducted in parallel with simulation capability development and was closely related to requirements definition for the simulations. As such, the CBR development effort presented herein had two objectives: explore CBR development practices in collaboration with the industry partners and develop an initial set of UAM CBRs to support simulation requirements definition and development. Consensus was achieved among NASA and the industry partners on 24 CBRs that were developed to support the cooperative simulation operations across five topic areas: General (related to test requirements), Operational Intent, Conformance Monitoring, Demand Capacity Balancing, and Airspace Constraint Management. Additional topic areas and CBRs were discussed but were deemed outside the scope of the simulation; these are included in the appendices. A collaborative, iterative process was employed for developing the CBRs engaging both NASA and Industry; because CBR development is envisioned to be community-driven, opportunities were sought that provided industry partners leadership roles in developing CBRs. The following key observations and recommendations may aid the UAM industry in future CBR development efforts: - The lack of a defined process proved challenging initially. Stakeholder engagement in the early stages of CBR development was intermittent and may have been due to the lack of a clear definition of roles and responsibilities of those involved in the effort. - Industry leadership of CBR topic areas proved successful. Discussions in these topic areas were engaging, with alternate viewpoints freely discussed and detailed CBRs resulting. This points to the importance of identifying the best-suited leadership in technical areas for CBR development. - Discussions within a CBR topic area were typically dominated by only a few participants. Whereas all industry partners contributed to CBR development, within each topic area, technical leadership was evident even when not formally established. This observation may indicate that smaller, focused groups may be more effective in initial CBR development than an open forum or large standards development effort (although both maybe required prior to FAA review and approval for some CBRs). - Identifying suitable forums for initial UAM CBR development and identifying the most effective industry participants and leadership will be crucial for successful CBR development. Although the operational need for UAM CBRs may not be immediate, establishing the forums and leadership to define the processes for CBR development is a prudent early step to UAM realization.

Community Based Rules↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Performance Evaluation of a Shaped Sonic Boom Detector and Classifier

NASA will soon fly the X‑59 aircraft over selected communities to evaluate community responses to shaped sonic booms. Community tests will include dozens of deployed acoustic sensors capable of measuring and detecting shaped sonic boom waveforms in situ for rapid onboard analysis. To this end, we present a sonic boom detector and classifier. The sonic boom detector identifies a shaped sonic boom within a measured acoustical waveform by calculating the cross-correlation with a template shaped sonic boom waveform. The sonic boom classifier determines whether the identified event is indeed a shaped sonic boom based on the correlation coefficient and the calculated noise exposure level. We evaluate these algorithms using simulations of on- and off-design X-59 sonic boom waveforms injected into previously measured 30 s ambient noise recordings. Results of this case study indicate that the detector identifies a sonic boom with an accuracy of ±100 ms in 99.98% of the cases. Furthermore, for a given 30 s measurement, the classifier shows true-positive rates of approximately 0.9999 when the false-positive rate is 10e-3. The case study demonstrates that the recommended onboard sonic boom detector and classifier should be highly capable of identifying shaped sonic booms.

sonic boom↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Safety Culture at the World’s Premier Multi-User Spaceport

NASA’s Agency-wide Safety Culture is implemented at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) using a unique strategy due an unparalleled approach in making human spaceflight history. Kennedy Space Center, the world’s premier multi-user spaceport, enables U.S. government and commercial space access, while providing the world a resource to allow the exploration of and the ability to work in space. A consistently healthy safety culture at KSC is imperative for mission success: desired achievements, protection of space flight hardware, and ultimately, the preservation of human life requires the support of a healthy safety culture. Emphasis on the NASA Agency-wide development of Safety Culture began with the conception of the NASA Agency Safety Culture Working Group. After the devastating loss of life and mission of the Space Shuttle Colombia, a broken safety culture was identified as an organizational cause by the Columbia Accident Investigation Board Report. Thus, the Agency Safety Culture Working Group was developed in 2009 to assess the status of the Agency’s Safety Culture, while addressing safety culture concerns at the NASA Center-level. A Five-factor model was developed to serve as the guiding principles for Safety Culture: 1) Reporting Culture, 2) Just Culture, 3) Flexible Culture, 4) Learning Culture, and 5) Engaged Culture. These five factors are included in the NASA Safety Culture logo, which was intentionally designed as a DNA double helix to prompt the permeation of safety into day-to-day work. KSC specifically implements the NASA Agency-wide Safety Culture principles in a tailored approach that is relevant to the diversity of work being performed. An emphasis is placed on the implementation to include safety at home, not exclusively at work. This emphasis is a KSC-specific element that has been intentionally added to promote a closed loop Safety Culture. To advertise the safety culture, various safety and health events are held throughout the calendar year, providing innovative speakers and engaging activities, while also promoting a wide range of curated safety initiatives. Development and continuous improvement of the KSC safety tracking database, allows for advanced tracking-to-closure, along with providing data sets used to identify areas of emphasis. Other safety initiatives rely solely on employee participation, such as the photo challenges; participants are encouraged to identify and capture themselves, coworkers, or family members participating in safe or healthy activities to share with others within the Center and at Agency levels. Fabrication of exclusive videos and graphics are utilized to advertise and inform employee of safety initiatives, upcoming safety events, and general dispersion of safety information. In addition, an anonymous Agency-wide Safety Culture Survey is advertised, administered, and analyzed at Kennedy Space Center, with the purpose of receiving basic feedback on Safety Culture perceptions to help prevent future incidents from occurring. Through these briefly identified means, and many other forms of employee engagement, Kennedy Space Center aims to maintain safety in the forefront, while creating an environment where everyone trusts that safety is a priority.

Larrin E. Moody↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Making Better Use of Satellite Data: The Satellite Needs Working Group

The U.S. Group on Earth Observations (USGEO) initiated in 2016 the Satellite Needs Working Group (SNWG) to identify and communicate the Earth observation needs of U.S. federal agencies. The SNWG identifies such needs through a biennial survey followed by interviews and follow-up discussions by the satellite Earth data providers of the U.S. Government: the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Solutions and services are identified that leverage current or upcoming satellite missions to meet the identified needs; implementation of services that are estimated to significantly increase the level of satisfaction of multiple U.S. agencies are funded by NASA. The SNWG process has resulted in the implementation of numerous services that have impacted operations of not only U.S. agencies but of academic and international institutions as well. Notable examples include the Harmonized Landsat Sentinel-2 project that leverages European Space Agency (ESA) and NASA satellite assets to generate a global, analysis-ready, surface reflectance product with a temporal resolution of two days; the Airborne Data Management Group that curates and provides access to relevant resources, information and data from existing and past NASA field campaigns; and the Dynamic Surface Water Extent product which consists of harmonized but independent water extents derived from both from optical and radar data. These and other products are hosted at the NASA Distributed Active Archive Centers (DAACs) for free and open access. The SNWG Management Office at NASA’s Interagency Implementation and Advanced Concepts Team (IMPACT) manages the implementation of selected solutions and, importantly, NASA’s response to the needs of federal agencies through a Stakeholder Engagement Program. The impact of implemented services and solutions is hampered without efforts to build capacity around the use of the services. The Stakeholder Engagement Program ensures relevant training and outreach to SNWG agencies in collaboration with each solution implementation team.

remote sensing↗