Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Science Directorate”

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 1,315 records · Page 73
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2012

Langston University - High Energy Physics (LU-HEP)

This final report is presented by Langston University (LU) for the project entitled "Langston University High Energy Physics" (LUHEP) under the direction of principal investigator (PI) and project director Professor Joel Snow. The project encompassed high energy physics research performed at hadron colliders. The PI is a collaborator on the DZero experiment at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia, IL, USA and the ATLAS experiment at CERN in Geneva, Switzerland and was during the entire project period from April 1, 1999 until May 14, 2012. Both experiments seek to understand the fundamental constituents of the physical universe and the forces that govern their interactions. In 1999 as member of the Online Systems group for Run 2 the PI developed a cross-platform Python-based, Graphical User Interface (GUI) application for monitoring and control of EPICS based devices for control room use. This served as a model for other developers to enhance and build on for further monitoring and control tasks written in Python. Subsequently the PI created and developed a cross-platform C++ GUI utilizing a networked client-server paradigm and based on ROOT, the object oriented analysis framework from CERN. The GUI served as a user interface to the Examine tasks running in the D\O\ control room which monitored the status and integrity of data taking for Run 2. The PI developed the histogram server/control interface to the GUI client for the EXAMINE processes. The histogram server was built from the ROOT framework and was integrated into the D\O\ framework used for online monitoring programs and offline analysis. The PI developed the first implementation of displaying histograms dynamically generated by ROOT in a Web Browser. The PI's work resulted in several talks and papers at international conferences and workshops. The PI established computing software infrastructure at LU and U. Oklahoma (OU) to do analysis of DZero production data and produce simulation data for the experiment. Eventually this included the FNAL SAM data grid system, the SAMGrid (SG) infrastructure, and the Open Science Grid software stacks for computing and storage elements. At the end of 2003 Snow took on the role of global Monte Carlo production coordinator for the DØ experiment. A role which continues til this day. In January of 2004 Snow started working with the SAMGrid development team to help debug, deploy, and integrate SAMGrid with DØ Monte Carlo production. Snow installed and configured SG execution and client sites at LUHEP and OUHEP, and a SG scheduler site at LUHEP. The PI developed a python based GUI (DAJ) that acts as a front end for job submission to SAMGrid. The GUI interfaces to the DZero Mone Carlo (MC) request system that uses SAM to manage MC requests by the physics analysis groups. DAJ significantly simplified SG job submission and was deployed in DZero in an effort to increase the user base of SG. The following year was the advent of SAMGrid job submission to the Open Science Grid (OSG) and LHC Computing Grid (LCG) through a forwarding mechanism. The PI oversaw the integration of these grids into the existing production infrastructure. The PI developed an automatic MC (Automc) request processing system capable of operating without user intervention (other than getting grid credentials), and able to submit to any number of sites on various grids. The system manages production at all but 2 sites. The system was deployed at Fermilab and remains operating there today. The PI's work in distributed computing resulted in several talks at international conferences. UTA, OU, and LU were chosen as the collaborating institutions that form the Southwest Tier 2 Center (SWT2) for ATLAS. During the project period the PI contributed to the online and offline software infrastructure through his work with the Run 2 online group, and played a major role in Monte Carlo production for DZero. During the part of the project period in which the PI served as MC production coordinator MC production increased very significantly. In the first year of the PI's tenure as production coordinator production was 159M events and 6.7~TB of data. During the last year of the project period production was 2,342~M events and 262~TB of data. That is a factor of 15 increase in events and 39 in data volume. The increase occurred with improvements in computer hardware and networks, through the use of grid technology on diverse resources, and through increased automation and efficiency of the production process. LU HEP developed and deployed the automatic MC request processing system in use at FNAL. The complementary strategies of automation and grid production served DZero well. Fermilab has recognized LU HEP's contribution to DZero by allowing the PI to devote full time to research activities by appointing him a guest scientist for the last six years of the project period.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗
DOE OSTI2018

Hyperspectral Raman imaging using a spatial heterodyne spectrometer (SHS)

Savannah River National Laboratory, and the larger community, has limited chemical-specific imaging capabilities, which would be beneficial for remote detection of threat chemicals or use in inaccessible and harsh environments, as well as in-line process monitoring. Chemical imaging technology would support multiple directorates through stand-off detection of chemicals (National Security), and imaging of chemical distributions in a process (Nuclear Materials Management, Clean Energy) and in waste tanks (Environmental Stewardship). Chemical-specific imaging is underdeveloped due to issues of sensitivity, stable alignment and calibration, and ease of operation associated with most optical instruments. The project objective is to develop a novel, rugged, highly sensitive spectrometer to support real-time, chemically specific imaging using hyperspectral Raman spectroscopy. Raman spectroscopic analysis will provide chemical specificity and using a spatial heterodyne spectrometer (SHS) will increase the sensitivity due to the high light throughput design. The SHS design does not require moving parts allowing for a very stable system, reducing alignment and calibration issues. The instrument will be assembled and initially applied to Raman gas detection of the Saltstone disposal unit headspace gas concentrations. Raman gas analysis is the most impacted by sensitivity issues and will be used to demonstrate the increased light collection capability of the SHS over a conventional dispersive spectrometer. The system will be later modified to image spectral information in a spatial domain to provide information on the spatial distribution of a sample scene.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
DOE OSTI2022

Cost of Capturing CO 2 from Industrial Sources

This systems analysis by the National Energy Technology Laboratory's Strategic Systems Analysis and Engineering directorate) evaluates the cost and performance impacts of capturing CO 2 emissions from nine industrial sources (ammonia, ethylene oxide, and ethanol production, natural gas process, coal- and gas-to-liquids, refinery hydrogen production, iron and steel, and cement manufacturing). The industrial sectors examined are segregated according to the CO 2 purity level of the flue gas stream, prior to treatment. Certain sectors naturally produce a gas stream that is inherently high in CO 2 purity, and these sectors can achieve 99-100% removal. Other sectors produce a lower purity CO 2 flue gas stream and achieving 90-99% removal requires deeper levels of treatment, adding cost. In addition to the report that documents the analysis, a Carbon Capture Retrofit Database tool was also created that allows users to apply CO 2 capture to selected industries, to evaluate the cost of capture and compare across multiple plants, as well as across different industries. Users have the ability to change select input parameters (such as fuel price, capture rate, and financing assumptions) to evaluate the impact on industrial CO 2 capture economics.

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2012

10 CFR 850 Implementation of Requirements

10 CFR 850 defines a contractor as any entity, including affiliated entities, such as a parent corporation, under contract with DOE, including a subcontractor at any tier, with responsibility for performing work at a DOE site in furtherance of a DOE mission. The Chronic Beryllium Disease Prevention Program (CBDPP) applies to beryllium-related activities that are performed at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The CBDPP or Beryllium Safety Program is integrated into the LLNL Worker Safety and Health Program and, thus, implementation documents and responsibilities are integrated in various documents and organizational structures. Program development and management of the CBDPP is delegated to the Environment, Safety and Health (ES&H) Directorate, Worker Safety and Health Functional Area. As per 10 CFR 850, Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS) periodically submits a CBDPP to the National Nuclear Security Administration/Livermore Site Office (NNSA/LSO). The requirements of this plan are communicated to LLNS workers through ES&H Manual Document 14.4, 'Working Safely with Beryllium.' 10 CFR 850 is implemented by the LLNL CBDPP, which integrates the safety and health standards required by the regulation, components of the LLNL Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS), and incorporates other components of the LLNL ES&H Program. As described in the regulation, and to fully comply with the regulation, specific portions of existing programs and additional requirements are identified in the CBDPP. The CBDPP is implemented by documents that interface with the workers, principally through ES&H Manual Document 14.4. This document contains information on how the management practices prescribed by the LLNL ISMS are implemented, how beryllium hazards that are associated with LLNL work activities are controlled, and who is responsible for implementing the controls. Adherence to the requirements and processes described in the ES&H Manual ensures that ES&H practices across LLNL are developed in a consistent manner. Other implementing documents, such as the ES&H Manual, are integral in effectively implementing 10 CFR 850.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

How does Mercury Methylation Respond to Intensive Forest Management and the Creation of Anoxia in Floodplain Soils

This research endeavor, entitled “How does Mercury Methylation Respond to Intensive Forest Management and the Creation of Anoxia in Floodplain Soils?” represents a collaborative effort undertaken by the University of North Carolina at Greensboro, led by Principal Investigator Dr. James S. Coleman, the United States Forest Service Santee Experimental Forest (SEF) Station Director Dr. Carl C. Trettin as Co-Principal Investigator, and The Chinese University of Hong Kong Dr. Martin Tsz-Ki Tsui and Dr. Alex T. Chow serving as Co-Principal Investigators. The overarching objective of this proposed project was to capture and elucidate the immediate and short-term effects of forest disturbances, namely clear-cutting and thinning, on the biogeochemical cycling of mercury (Hg) within the SEF in Huger, South Carolina. To accomplish this objective, a two-year exploratory study was proposed to conduct soil sampling and measurements of Hg and toxic methylmercury (MeHg), and soil physiochemical data within the experimental watershed (WS77) at SEF, following the clear-cutting process initiated for the preparation of the native longleaf pine restoration project by the USFS. Based on our mercury and hydrological data assessment, we concluded that the implementation of forest management practices, particularly mechanical thinning and clear-cutting, appears to enhance the potential for Hg methylation. Furthermore, these forest management practices may disrupt and alter the storage, mobility, and transformations of atmospherically deposited Hg in these lowland forests. We advocate for further research to comprehensively evaluate the impact of forest management on Hg cycling within forest ecosystems.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

Initiated chemical vapor deposited nanoadhesive for bonding National Ignition Facility's targets

Currently, the target fabrication scientists in National Ignition Facility Directorate at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) is studying the propagation force resulted from laser impulses impacting a target. To best study this, they would like the adhesive used to glue the target substrates to be as thin as possible. The main objective of this research project is to create adhesive glue bonds for NIF’s targets that are ≤ 1 μm thick. Polyglycidylmethacrylate (PGMA) thin films were coated on various substrates using initiated chemical vapor deposition (iCVD). Film quality studies using white light interferometry reveal that the iCVD PGMA films were smooth. The coated substrates were bonded at 150 °C under vacuum, with low inflow of Nitrogen. Success in bonding most of NIF’s mock targets at thicknesses ≤ 1 μm indicates that our process is feasible in bonding the real targets. Key parameters that are required for successful bonding were concluded from the bonding results. They include inert bonding atmosphere, sufficient contact between the PGMA films, and smooth substrates. Average bond strength of 0.60 MPa was obtained from mechanical shearing tests. The bonding failure mode of the sheared interfaces was observed to be cohesive. Future work on this project will include reattempt to bond silica aerogel to iCVD PGMA coated substrates, stabilize carbon nanotube forests with iCVD PGMA coating, and kinetics study of PGMA thermal crosslinking.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2015

WE-G-213-01: Roentgen and the Birth of Modern Medical Physics

Roentgen and the Birth of Modern Medical Physics – Perry Sprawls Wilhelm Roentgen is well known for his discovery of x-radiation. What is less known and appreciated is his intensive research following the discovery to determine the characteristics of the “new kind of radiation” and demonstrate its great value for medical purposes. In this presentation we will imagine ourselves in Roentgen’s mind and follow his thinking, including questions and doubts, as he designs and conducts a series of innovative experiments that provided the foundation for the rapid growth of medical physics. Learning Objectives: Become familiar with the personal characteristics and work of Prof. Roentgen that establishes him as an inspiring model for the medical physics profession. Observe the thought process and experiments that determined and demonstrated the comprehensive characteristics of x-radiation. The AAPM Award Eponyms: William D. Coolidge, Edith H. Quimby, and Marvin M.D. Williams - Who were they and what did they do? – Lawrence N. Rothenberg William David Coolidge (1873–1975) William Coolidge was born in Hudson, NY in 1873. He obtained his BS at the Massacusetts Institute of Technology in 1896. Coolidge then went to the University of Leipzig, Germany for graduate study with physicists Paul Drude and Gustave Wiedemann and received a Ph.D. in 1899. While in Germany he met Wilhelm Roentgen. Coolidge returned to the US to teach at MIT where he was associated with Arthur A. Noyes of the Chemistry Department, working on the electrical conductivity of aqueous solutions. Willis R. Whitney, under whom Coolidge had worked before going to Germany, became head of the newly formed General Electric Research Laboratory and he invited Coolidge to work with him. In 1905, Coolidge joined the staff of the GE laboratory and was associated with it for the remainder of his life. He developed ductile tungsten filaments to replace fragile carbon filaments as the material for electric light bulb filaments. Until that innovation light bulbs had a notoriously short life. He later incorporated the ductile tungsten as a filament material for a hot cathode, fully evacuated x-ray tube, first described in 1912, which allowed higher current and x-ray output, and greater reliability than had previously been possible. These “Coolidge x-ray tubes” were far superior to the cold cathode, partial pressure gas x-ray tubes that had been in use since Roentgen’s discovery of x-rays in 1895. The Coolidge tube with incremental developments is now the key component for x-ray production in all of our modern x-ray imaging devices, such as CT scanners, interventional radiology systems, and mammography units. Coolidge was also involved in the development of sectional x-ray tubes for research and treatment that were initially designed to reach 800 kV. Additional improvements led to 1 MV and 2 MV devices. In 1932 Coolidge became director of the General Electric Research Laboratory, and in 1940, was made Vice-President and Director of Research. In 1945 he retired and was named Director Emeritus of the laboratory. Coolidge held 83 patents and was recognized for these and many other achievements by election to the National Academy of Engineers, a place in the Engineering Hall of Fame and the National Inventor’s Hall of Fame. The AAPM’s highest honor, the Coolidge Award, was named after him. He accepted Honorary Membership in the AAPM and was the first recipient of the AAPM Coolidge Award, which was presented to him in a special ceremony in Schenectady, NY in 1972 when he was 100 years old. Edith Hinckley Quimby (1891–1982) Edith Quimby was born in Rockford, IL in 1891. She graduated from Whitman College in Walla Walla, WA with a B.S. in 1913, and then obtained a masters degree from the University of California at Berkeley. Later in her career, after many significant achievements, Quimby was awarded honorary doctorates by Whitman College and Rutgers University. Edith Quimby was hired by Giacchino Failla as a radiation physicist at Memorial Hospital for Cancer in New York City. Failla had studied with Madame Curie and obtained his doctoral degree in her laboratory. After many groundbreaking medical physics studies from 1919 until 1942, they both moved to Columbia University. Dr. Quimby developed a widely employed dosimetry system for single plane implants with radium and radon seeds, and a dosimetry methodology for internal radionuclides. She was author of more than 75 scientific publications, and of significant textbooks including the first comprehensive physics textbook for radiologists “Physical Foundations of Radiology”, which was co-authored with Otto Glasser, Lauriston Taylor and James Weatherwax in the first edition, with Russell Morgan added for the second edition and Paul Goodwin for the fourth edition. With Sergei Feitelberg, M.D. she published two editions of “Radioactive Isotopes in Medicine and Biology: Basic Physics and Instrumentation”. Quimby became a renowned examiner for the American Board of Radiology when the third ABR examination, given in 1936, added physics. She served as President of the American Radium Society, received the RSNA Gold Medal, and also numerous prestigious awards given to women in science. Edith Quimby was a Charter Member of AAPM. The AAPM Lifetime Achievement Award was renamed the Edith H. Quimby Lifetime Achievement Award in her honor in 2011. Marvin Martin Dixon Williams (1902–1981) Marvin Williams was born in Walla Walla, WA in 1902, and attended the same college as Edith Quimby, graduating from Whitman College in 1926. He was greatly influenced to go into medical physics by her accomplishments. During his early career, Williams worked with James Weatherwax in Philadelphia while he was working toward an M.S. from the University of Pennsylvania. In 1931 Williams was awarded a Ph.D. in Biophysics from the University of Minnesota, with the work actually performed at the Mayo Clinic Graduate School of the University. While completing his Ph.D. studies, Marvin met Dr. Paul Hodges who had returned from the Peiping Union Medical College in Peiping (now Beijing), China. Hodges suggested that a physicist be sent to Peiping to install x-ray therapy equipment and a radon plant. Williams accepted the position and, in 1931, he and his wife Orpha left for China. Before going to China, Williams had spent time with the physics group at Memorial Hospital to learn about the operation of a radon plant. In China, he constructed the radon plant, employing 0.25 g of radium, and also installed the x-ray therapy unit. Williams and his wife returned to the US in 1935, and he accepted a research position at the Mayo Clinic. In 1950, he became Professor of Biophysics at Mayo, where he taught physics and biophysics until his retirement in 1967. Williams was also very active in the American Board of Radiology where, from 1944 through 1977, he examined over 3000 radiologists and 250 physicists. Marvin Williams was a Charter member of AAPM, served as the fourth President of AAPM in 1963, and was the fourth recipient the AAPM Coolidge Award in 1975. The Marvin Williams Award was originally established as the highest award of the American College of Medical Physics. When various functions of the ACMP were absorbed into the AAPM in 2012, the Marvin M D Williams Professional Achievement Award became one of the AAPM’s highest honors. Learning Objectives: Become familiar with the persons in whose honor the three major AAPM Award are named Learn about the achievements and activities which influenced the AAPM to name these awards in their honor.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

WE-G-213-00: History Symposium: Radiological Physics Pioneers: Roentgen and the AAPM Award Eponyms - William Coolidge, Edith Quimby, and Marvin Williams - Who Were They and What Did They Do?

Roentgen and the Birth of Modern Medical Physics – Perry Sprawls Wilhelm Roentgen is well known for his discovery of x-radiation. What is less known and appreciated is his intensive research following the discovery to determine the characteristics of the “new kind of radiation” and demonstrate its great value for medical purposes. In this presentation we will imagine ourselves in Roentgen’s mind and follow his thinking, including questions and doubts, as he designs and conducts a series of innovative experiments that provided the foundation for the rapid growth of medical physics. Learning Objectives: Become familiar with the personal characteristics and work of Prof. Roentgen that establishes him as an inspiring model for the medical physics profession. Observe the thought process and experiments that determined and demonstrated the comprehensive characteristics of x-radiation. The AAPM Award Eponyms: William D. Coolidge, Edith H. Quimby, and Marvin M.D. Williams - Who were they and what did they do? – Lawrence N. Rothenberg William David Coolidge (1873–1975) William Coolidge was born in Hudson, NY in 1873. He obtained his BS at the Massacusetts Institute of Technology in 1896. Coolidge then went to the University of Leipzig, Germany for graduate study with physicists Paul Drude and Gustave Wiedemann and received a Ph.D. in 1899. While in Germany he met Wilhelm Roentgen. Coolidge returned to the US to teach at MIT where he was associated with Arthur A. Noyes of the Chemistry Department, working on the electrical conductivity of aqueous solutions. Willis R. Whitney, under whom Coolidge had worked before going to Germany, became head of the newly formed General Electric Research Laboratory and he invited Coolidge to work with him. In 1905, Coolidge joined the staff of the GE laboratory and was associated with it for the remainder of his life. He developed ductile tungsten filaments to replace fragile carbon filaments as the material for electric light bulb filaments. Until that innovation light bulbs had a notoriously short life. He later incorporated the ductile tungsten as a filament material for a hot cathode, fully evacuated x-ray tube, first described in 1912, which allowed higher current and x-ray output, and greater reliability than had previously been possible. These “Coolidge x-ray tubes” were far superior to the cold cathode, partial pressure gas x-ray tubes that had been in use since Roentgen’s discovery of x-rays in 1895. The Coolidge tube with incremental developments is now the key component for x-ray production in all of our modern x-ray imaging devices, such as CT scanners, interventional radiology systems, and mammography units. Coolidge was also involved in the development of sectional x-ray tubes for research and treatment that were initially designed to reach 800 kV. Additional improvements led to 1 MV and 2 MV devices. In 1932 Coolidge became director of the General Electric Research Laboratory, and in 1940, was made Vice-President and Director of Research. In 1945 he retired and was named Director Emeritus of the laboratory. Coolidge held 83 patents and was recognized for these and many other achievements by election to the National Academy of Engineers, a place in the Engineering Hall of Fame and the National Inventor’s Hall of Fame. The AAPM’s highest honor, the Coolidge Award, was named after him. He accepted Honorary Membership in the AAPM and was the first recipient of the AAPM Coolidge Award, which was presented to him in a special ceremony in Schenectady, NY in 1972 when he was 100 years old. Edith Hinckley Quimby (1891–1982) Edith Quimby was born in Rockford, IL in 1891. She graduated from Whitman College in Walla Walla, WA with a B.S. in 1913, and then obtained a masters degree from the University of California at Berkeley. Later in her career, after many significant achievements, Quimby was awarded honorary doctorates by Whitman College and Rutgers University. Edith Quimby was hired by Giacchino Failla as a radiation physicist at Memorial Hospital for Cancer in New York City. Failla had studied with Madame Curie and obtained his doctoral degree in her laboratory. After many groundbreaking medical physics studies from 1919 until 1942, they both moved to Columbia University. Dr. Quimby developed a widely employed dosimetry system for single plane implants with radium and radon seeds, and a dosimetry methodology for internal radionuclides. She was author of more than 75 scientific publications, and of significant textbooks including the first comprehensive physics textbook for radiologists “Physical Foundations of Radiology”, which was co-authored with Otto Glasser, Lauriston Taylor and James Weatherwax in the first edition, with Russell Morgan added for the second edition and Paul Goodwin for the fourth edition. With Sergei Feitelberg, M.D. she published two editions of “Radioactive Isotopes in Medicine and Biology: Basic Physics and Instrumentation”. Quimby became a renowned examiner for the American Board of Radiology when the third ABR examination, given in 1936, added physics. She served as President of the American Radium Society, received the RSNA Gold Medal, and also numerous prestigious awards given to women in science. Edith Quimby was a Charter Member of AAPM. The AAPM Lifetime Achievement Award was renamed the Edith H. Quimby Lifetime Achievement Award in her honor in 2011. Marvin Martin Dixon Williams (1902–1981) Marvin Williams was born in Walla Walla, WA in 1902, and attended the same college as Edith Quimby, graduating from Whitman College in 1926. He was greatly influenced to go into medical physics by her accomplishments. During his early career, Williams worked with James Weatherwax in Philadelphia while he was working toward an M.S. from the University of Pennsylvania. In 1931 Williams was awarded a Ph.D. in Biophysics from the University of Minnesota, with the work actually performed at the Mayo Clinic Graduate School of the University. While completing his Ph.D. studies, Marvin met Dr. Paul Hodges who had returned from the Peiping Union Medical College in Peiping (now Beijing), China. Hodges suggested that a physicist be sent to Peiping to install x-ray therapy equipment and a radon plant. Williams accepted the position and, in 1931, he and his wife Orpha left for China. Before going to China, Williams had spent time with the physics group at Memorial Hospital to learn about the operation of a radon plant. In China, he constructed the radon plant, employing 0.25 g of radium, and also installed the x-ray therapy unit. Williams and his wife returned to the US in 1935, and he accepted a research position at the Mayo Clinic. In 1950, he became Professor of Biophysics at Mayo, where he taught physics and biophysics until his retirement in 1967. Williams was also very active in the American Board of Radiology where, from 1944 through 1977, he examined over 3000 radiologists and 250 physicists. Marvin Williams was a Charter member of AAPM, served as the fourth President of AAPM in 1963, and was the fourth recipient the AAPM Coolidge Award in 1975. The Marvin Williams Award was originally established as the highest award of the American College of Medical Physics. When various functions of the ACMP were absorbed into the AAPM in 2012, the Marvin M D Williams Professional Achievement Award became one of the AAPM’s highest honors. Learning Objectives: Become familiar with the persons in whose honor the three major AAPM Award are named Learn about the achievements and activities which influenced the AAPM to name these awards in their honor.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

WE-G-213-02: The AAPM Award Eponyms: William D. Coolidge, Edith H. Quimby, and Marvin M.D. Williams - Who Were They and What Did They Do?

Roentgen and the Birth of Modern Medical Physics – Perry Sprawls Wilhelm Roentgen is well known for his discovery of x-radiation. What is less known and appreciated is his intensive research following the discovery to determine the characteristics of the “new kind of radiation” and demonstrate its great value for medical purposes. In this presentation we will imagine ourselves in Roentgen’s mind and follow his thinking, including questions and doubts, as he designs and conducts a series of innovative experiments that provided the foundation for the rapid growth of medical physics. Learning Objectives: Become familiar with the personal characteristics and work of Prof. Roentgen that establishes him as an inspiring model for the medical physics profession. Observe the thought process and experiments that determined and demonstrated the comprehensive characteristics of x-radiation. The AAPM Award Eponyms: William D. Coolidge, Edith H. Quimby, and Marvin M.D. Williams - Who were they and what did they do? – Lawrence N. Rothenberg William David Coolidge (1873–1975) William Coolidge was born in Hudson, NY in 1873. He obtained his BS at the Massacusetts Institute of Technology in 1896. Coolidge then went to the University of Leipzig, Germany for graduate study with physicists Paul Drude and Gustave Wiedemann and received a Ph.D. in 1899. While in Germany he met Wilhelm Roentgen. Coolidge returned to the US to teach at MIT where he was associated with Arthur A. Noyes of the Chemistry Department, working on the electrical conductivity of aqueous solutions. Willis R. Whitney, under whom Coolidge had worked before going to Germany, became head of the newly formed General Electric Research Laboratory and he invited Coolidge to work with him. In 1905, Coolidge joined the staff of the GE laboratory and was associated with it for the remainder of his life. He developed ductile tungsten filaments to replace fragile carbon filaments as the material for electric light bulb filaments. Until that innovation light bulbs had a notoriously short life. He later incorporated the ductile tungsten as a filament material for a hot cathode, fully evacuated x-ray tube, first described in 1912, which allowed higher current and x-ray output, and greater reliability than had previously been possible. These “Coolidge x-ray tubes” were far superior to the cold cathode, partial pressure gas x-ray tubes that had been in use since Roentgen’s discovery of x-rays in 1895. The Coolidge tube with incremental developments is now the key component for x-ray production in all of our modern x-ray imaging devices, such as CT scanners, interventional radiology systems, and mammography units. Coolidge was also involved in the development of sectional x-ray tubes for research and treatment that were initially designed to reach 800 kV. Additional improvements led to 1 MV and 2 MV devices. In 1932 Coolidge became director of the General Electric Research Laboratory, and in 1940, was made Vice-President and Director of Research. In 1945 he retired and was named Director Emeritus of the laboratory. Coolidge held 83 patents and was recognized for these and many other achievements by election to the National Academy of Engineers, a place in the Engineering Hall of Fame and the National Inventor’s Hall of Fame. The AAPM’s highest honor, the Coolidge Award, was named after him. He accepted Honorary Membership in the AAPM and was the first recipient of the AAPM Coolidge Award, which was presented to him in a special ceremony in Schenectady, NY in 1972 when he was 100 years old. Edith Hinckley Quimby (1891–1982) Edith Quimby was born in Rockford, IL in 1891. She graduated from Whitman College in Walla Walla, WA with a B.S. in 1913, and then obtained a masters degree from the University of California at Berkeley. Later in her career, after many significant achievements, Quimby was awarded honorary doctorates by Whitman College and Rutgers University. Edith Quimby was hired by Giacchino Failla as a radiation physicist at Memorial Hospital for Cancer in New York City. Failla had studied with Madame Curie and obtained his doctoral degree in her laboratory. After many groundbreaking medical physics studies from 1919 until 1942, they both moved to Columbia University. Dr. Quimby developed a widely employed dosimetry system for single plane implants with radium and radon seeds, and a dosimetry methodology for internal radionuclides. She was author of more than 75 scientific publications, and of significant textbooks including the first comprehensive physics textbook for radiologists “Physical Foundations of Radiology”, which was co-authored with Otto Glasser, Lauriston Taylor and James Weatherwax in the first edition, with Russell Morgan added for the second edition and Paul Goodwin for the fourth edition. With Sergei Feitelberg, M.D. she published two editions of “Radioactive Isotopes in Medicine and Biology: Basic Physics and Instrumentation”. Quimby became a renowned examiner for the American Board of Radiology when the third ABR examination, given in 1936, added physics. She served as President of the American Radium Society, received the RSNA Gold Medal, and also numerous prestigious awards given to women in science. Edith Quimby was a Charter Member of AAPM. The AAPM Lifetime Achievement Award was renamed the Edith H. Quimby Lifetime Achievement Award in her honor in 2011. Marvin Martin Dixon Williams (1902–1981) Marvin Williams was born in Walla Walla, WA in 1902, and attended the same college as Edith Quimby, graduating from Whitman College in 1926. He was greatly influenced to go into medical physics by her accomplishments. During his early career, Williams worked with James Weatherwax in Philadelphia while he was working toward an M.S. from the University of Pennsylvania. In 1931 Williams was awarded a Ph.D. in Biophysics from the University of Minnesota, with the work actually performed at the Mayo Clinic Graduate School of the University. While completing his Ph.D. studies, Marvin met Dr. Paul Hodges who had returned from the Peiping Union Medical College in Peiping (now Beijing), China. Hodges suggested that a physicist be sent to Peiping to install x-ray therapy equipment and a radon plant. Williams accepted the position and, in 1931, he and his wife Orpha left for China. Before going to China, Williams had spent time with the physics group at Memorial Hospital to learn about the operation of a radon plant. In China, he constructed the radon plant, employing 0.25 g of radium, and also installed the x-ray therapy unit. Williams and his wife returned to the US in 1935, and he accepted a research position at the Mayo Clinic. In 1950, he became Professor of Biophysics at Mayo, where he taught physics and biophysics until his retirement in 1967. Williams was also very active in the American Board of Radiology where, from 1944 through 1977, he examined over 3000 radiologists and 250 physicists. Marvin Williams was a Charter member of AAPM, served as the fourth President of AAPM in 1963, and was the fourth recipient the AAPM Coolidge Award in 1975. The Marvin Williams Award was originally established as the highest award of the American College of Medical Physics. When various functions of the ACMP were absorbed into the AAPM in 2012, the Marvin M D Williams Professional Achievement Award became one of the AAPM’s highest honors. Learning Objectives: Become familiar with the persons in whose honor the three major AAPM Award are named Learn about the achievements and activities which influenced the AAPM to name these awards in their honor.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

TU-CD-303-00: In Memoriam of Warren Sinclair: Physics Applications for New Radiobiology

The Medical Physics and Radiation Protection communities lost one of their true pioneers in May, 2014 with the passing of Warren K. Sinclair, Ph.D. He received his Doctorate in Physics at the University of London, U.K. He was a fellow of the Institute of Physics and a Certified Health Physicist. After a number of posts at Hospitals and Universities in the U.K. and New Zealand, he became the Head, Physics Department at the M.D. Anderson Hospital, Houston, TX. He held a number of academic physics positions with the University of Texas, Austin at the main campus and at the Postgraduate School of Medicine, Houston. He later served as a Senior Biophysicist, Division Director, and then Associate Laboratory Director for Biomedical Division Director, and then Associate Laboratory Director for Biomedical and Environmental Research at the Argonne National Laboratory, IL. He had additional academic appointments at the University of California, Berkeley; Northern Illinois University; the University of Illinois (Chicago Circle Campus); and the University of Chicago. Warren was a charter member of the AAPM and a leader in many communities: President of the AAPM from 1960 to 1961 and the Journal Editor from 1964 to 1969, the 2nd President of the NCRP from 1977 to 1991, and the President of the Radiation Research Society from 1978 to 1979. His many awards included the William D. Coolidge Award in 1986. Even this barely scratches the surface of the many other organizations he served with and influenced including the ICRP, IOP, RSNA, SNM, and UNSCEAR. His research interests resulted in publications from 1948 to the 1990s in many aspects (physical and biological) of radiotherapy and the effects of ionizing radiation in general, leading to early definitions of RBE values for megavoltage radiotherapy as well as contributing to the development of the modern framework for radiation protection worldwide. Warren was not a retiring person and even after moving to NCRP President Emeritus status continued to provide advice and comments on publications and to mentor others until the time of his passing. Sadly, Warren’s long-time wife Joy passed away in December, 2014 but he is survived by his son Bruce and daughter Roslyn, 2 grandchildren and 4 great-grandchildren.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

TU-CD-303-01: Memorial to Warren Sinclair - Memorial Lecturer

The Medical Physics and Radiation Protection communities lost one of their true pioneers in May, 2014 with the passing of Warren K. Sinclair, Ph.D. He received his Doctorate in Physics at the University of London, U.K. He was a fellow of the Institute of Physics and a Certified Health Physicist. After a number of posts at Hospitals and Universities in the U.K. and New Zealand, he became the Head, Physics Department at the M.D. Anderson Hospital, Houston, TX. He held a number of academic physics positions with the University of Texas, Austin at the main campus and at the Postgraduate School of Medicine, Houston. He later served as a Senior Biophysicist, Division Director, and then Associate Laboratory Director for Biomedical Division Director, and then Associate Laboratory Director for Biomedical and Environmental Research at the Argonne National Laboratory, IL. He had additional academic appointments at the University of California, Berkeley; Northern Illinois University; the University of Illinois (Chicago Circle Campus); and the University of Chicago. Warren was a charter member of the AAPM and a leader in many communities: President of the AAPM from 1960 to 1961 and the Journal Editor from 1964 to 1969, the 2nd President of the NCRP from 1977 to 1991, and the President of the Radiation Research Society from 1978 to 1979. His many awards included the William D. Coolidge Award in 1986. Even this barely scratches the surface of the many other organizations he served with and influenced including the ICRP, IOP, RSNA, SNM, and UNSCEAR. His research interests resulted in publications from 1948 to the 1990s in many aspects (physical and biological) of radiotherapy and the effects of ionizing radiation in general, leading to early definitions of RBE values for megavoltage radiotherapy as well as contributing to the development of the modern framework for radiation protection worldwide. Warren was not a retiring person and even after moving to NCRP President Emeritus status continued to provide advice and comments on publications and to mentor others until the time of his passing. Sadly, Warren’s long-time wife Joy passed away in December, 2014 but he is survived by his son Bruce and daughter Roslyn, 2 grandchildren and 4 great-grandchildren.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
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 NTRS2008

ESMD Space Grant Faculty Report

The strength of the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate ESMD Faculty Project lies in its ability to meet National Aeronautics Space Administration NASA's Strategic Educational Outcome 1 by developing a sustainable and long-term integration of student involvement at academic institutions with all NASA Centers. This outcome is achieved by a three-fold approach: 1) by collecting Senior Design projects pertaining to Constellation work performed at each of the ten NASA Centers, 2) by engaging students at Minority Serving Institutions in the art of systems engineering and systems design of technologies required for space exploration, and 3) by identifying potential internships at each Center relative to exploration that provide students who are supported by their institutional Space Grant to engage in on-going mission-level and explorative systems designs. The objectives of the ESMD Faculty Project are to: 1. Aid the Centers (both Education Offices and associated technical organizations) in providing relevant opportunities for the ESMD Space Grant Program to support student and faculty in Senior Design projects 2. Enable better matches between the ESMD work required and what the Space Grant Consortia can do to effectively contribute to NASA programs 3. Provide the Space Grant Consortia an opportunity to strengthen relations with the NASA Centers 4. Develop better collective understanding of the U.S. Space Exploration Policy by the Center, Space Grant, faculty, Education Office, and students 5. Enable Space Grant institution faculty to better prepare their students to meet current and future NASA needs 6. Enable the Center Education Offices to strengthen their ties to their technical organizations and Space Grant Consortia 7. Aid KSC in gaining a greater and more detailed understanding of each of the Center activities Senior Design projects are intended to stimulate undergraduate students on current NASA activities related to lunar, Mars, and other planetary missions and to bring out innovative and novel ideas that can be used to complement those currently under development at respective NASA Centers. Additionally, such academic involvement would better the prospects for graduating seniors to pursue graduate studies and to seek careers in the space industry with a strong sense for systems engineering and understanding of design concepts. Internships, on the other hand, are intended to provide hands-on experience to students by engaging them in diverse state-of-the-art technology development, prototype bread-boarding, computer modeling and simulations, hardware and software testing, and other activities that provide students a strong perspective of NASA's vision and mission in enhancing the knowledge of Earth and space planetary sciences. Ten faculty members, each from a Space Grant Consortium-affiliated university, worked at ten NASA Centers for five weeks between June 2 and July 3, 2008. The project objectives listed above were achieved. In addition to collecting data on Senior Design ideas and identifying possible internships that would benefit NASA/ESMD, the faculty fellows promoted and collected data when required for other ESMD-funded programs and helped the Center's Education Office, as,needed. 4

Guo, Jiang↗
NASA NTRS2016

Space Launch System Spacecraft and Payload Elements: Making Progress Toward First Launch

Significant and substantial progress continues to be accomplished in the design, development, and testing of the Space Launch System (SLS), the most powerful human-rated launch vehicle the United States has ever undertaken. Designed to support human missions into deep space, SLS is one of three programs being managed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA's) Exploration Systems Development directorate. The Orion spacecraft program is developing a new crew vehicle that will support human missions beyond low Earth orbit, and the Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) program is transforming Kennedy Space Center (KSC) into next-generation spaceport capable of supporting not only SLS but also multiple commercial users. Together, these systems will support human exploration missions into the proving ground of cislunar space and ultimately to Mars. SLS will deliver a near-term heavy-lift capability for the nation with its 70 metric ton Block 1 configuration, and will then evolve to an ultimate capability of 130 metric tons. The SLS program marked a major milestone with the successful completion of the Critical Design Review in which detailed designs were reviewed and subsequently approved for proceeding with full-scale production. This marks the first time an exploration class vehicle has passed that major milestone since the Saturn V vehicle launched astronauts in the 1960s during the Apollo program. Each element of the vehicle now has flight hardware in production in support of the initial flight of the SLS - Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1), an uncrewed mission to orbit the moon and return, and progress in on track to meet the initial targeted launch date in 2018. In Utah and Mississippi, booster and engine testing are verifying upgrades made to proven shuttle hardware. At Michoud Assembly Facility (MAF) in Louisiana, the world's largest spacecraft welding tool is producing tanks for the SLS core stage. This paper will particularly focus on work taking place at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) and United Launch Alliance (ULA) in Alabama, where upper stage and adapter elements of the vehicle are being constructed and tested. Providing the Orion crew capsule/launch vehicle interface and in-space propulsion via a cryogenic upper stage, the Spacecraft/Payload Integration and Evolution (SPIE) Element serves a key role in achieving SLS goals and objectives. The SPIE element marked a major milestone in 2014 with the first flight of original SLS hardware, the Orion Stage Adapter (OSA) which was used on Exploration Flight Test-1 with a design that will be used again on EM-1. Construction is already underway on the EM-1 Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS), an in-space stage derived from the Delta Cryogenic Second Stage. Manufacture of the Orion Stage Adapter and the Launch Vehicle Stage Adapter is set to begin at the Friction Stir Facility located at MSFC while structural test articles are either completed (OSA) or nearing completion (Launch Vehicle Stage Adapter). An overview is provided of the launch vehicle capabilities, with a specific focus on SPIE Element qualification/testing progress, as well as efforts to provide access to deep space regions currently not available to the science community through a secondary payload capability utilizing CubeSat-class satellites.

Schorr, Andrew A.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Space Launch System Spacecraft and Payload Elements: Making Progress Toward First Launch

Significant and substantial progress continues to be accomplished in the design, development, and testing of the Space Launch System (SLS), the most powerful human-rated launch vehicle the United States has ever undertaken. Designed to support human missions into deep space, SLS is one of three programs being managed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA's) Exploration Systems Development directorate. The Orion spacecraft program is developing a new crew vehicle that will support human missions beyond low Earth orbit, and the Ground Systems Development and Operations program is transforming Kennedy Space Center into next-generation spaceport capable of supporting not only SLS but also multiple commercial users. Together, these systems will support human exploration missions into the proving ground of cislunar space and ultimately to Mars. SLS will deliver a near-term heavy-lift capability for the nation with its 70 metric ton (t) Block 1 configuration, and will then evolve to an ultimate capability of 130 t. The SLS program marked a major milestone with the successful completion of the Critical Design Review in which detailed designs were reviewed and subsequently approved for proceeding with full-scale production. This marks the first time an exploration class vehicle has passed that major milestone since the Saturn V vehicle launched astronauts in the 1960s during the Apollo program. Each element of the vehicle now has flight hardware in production in support of the initial flight of the SLS -- Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1), an un-crewed mission to orbit the moon and return. Encompassing hardware qualification, structural testing to validate hardware compliance and analytical modeling, progress in on track to meet the initial targeted launch date in 2018. In Utah and Mississippi, booster and engine testing are verifying upgrades made to proven shuttle hardware. At Michoud Assembly Facility in Louisiana, the world's largest spacecraft welding tool is producing tanks for the SLS core stage. This paper will particularly focus on work taking place at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) and United Launch Alliance in Alabama, where upper stage and adapter elements of the vehicle are being constructed and tested. Providing the Orion crew capsule/launch vehicle interface and in-space propulsion via a cryogenic upper stage, the Spacecraft/Payload Integration and Evolution (SPIE) Element serves a key role in achieving SLS goals and objectives. The SPIE element marked a major milestone in 2014 with the first flight of original SLS hardware, the Orion Stage Adapter (OSA) which was used on Exploration Flight Test-1 with a design that will be used again on EM-1. Construction is already underway on the EM-1 Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage (ICPS), an in-space stage derived from the Delta Cryogenic Second Stage. Manufacture of the Orion Stage Adapter and the Launch Vehicle Stage Adapter is set to begin at the Friction Stir Facility located at MSFC while structural test articles are either completed (OSA) or nearing completion (Launch Vehicle Stage Adapter). An overview is provided of the launch vehicle capabilities, with a specific focus on SPIE Element qualification/testing progress, as well as efforts to provide access to deep space regions currently not available to the science community through a secondary payload capability utilizing CubeSat-class satellites.

Schorr, Andrew A.↗
DOE OSTI2017

Theoretical and Experimental Studies in Accelerator Physics

This report describes research supported by the US Dept. of Energy Office of High Energy Physics (OHEP), performed by the UCLA Particle Beam Physics Laboratory (PBPL). The UCLA PBPL has, over the last two decades-plus, played a critical role in the development of advanced accelerators, fundamental beam physics, and new applications enabled by these thrusts, such as new types of accelerator-based light sources. As the PBPL mission is broad it is natural that it has been grown within the context of the accelerator science and technology stewardship of the OHEP. Indeed, steady OHEP support for the program has always been central to the success of the PBPL; it has provided stability, and above all has set the over-arching themes for our research directions, which have producing over 500 publications (>120 in high level journals). While other agency support has grown notably in recent years, permitting more vigorous pursuit of the program, it is transient by comparison. Beyond permitting program growth in a time of flat OHEP budgets, the influence of other agency missions is found in push to adapt advanced accelerator methods to applications, in light of the success the field has had in proof-of-principle experiments supported first by the DoE OHEP. This three-pronged PBPL program — advanced accelerators, fundamental beam physics and technology, and revolutionary applications — has produced a generation of students that have had a profound affect on the US accelerator physics community. PBPL graduates, numbering 28 in total, form a significant population group in the accelerator community, playing key roles as university faculty, scientific leaders in national labs (two have been named Panofsky Fellows at SLAC), and vigorous proponents of industrial application of accelerators. Indeed, the development of advanced RF, optical and magnet technology at the PBPL has led directly to the spin-off company, RadiaBeam Technologies, now a leading industrial accelerator firm. We note also that PBPL graduates remain as close elaborators for the program after leaving UCLA. The UCLA PBPL program is a foremost developer of on-campus facilities, such as the Neptune and Pegasus Laboratories, providing a uniquely strong environment for student-based research. In addition, the PBPL is a strong user of off-campus national lab facilities, such as SLAC FACET and NLCTA, and the BNL ATF. UCLA has also vigorously participated in the development of these facilities. The dual emphases on off- and on-campus opportunities permit the PBPL to address in an agile way a wide selection of cutting-edge research topics. The topics embraced by this proposal illustrate this program aspect well. These include: GV/m dielectric wakefield acceleration/coherent Cerenkov radiation experiments at FACET (E-201) and the ATF; synergistic laser-excited dielectric accelerator and light source development; plasma wakefield (PWFA) experiments on “Trojan horse” ionization injection (FACET E-210), quasi-nonlinear PWFA at BNL and the production at Neptune high transformer ratio plasma wakes; the inauguration of a new type of RF photoinjector termed “hybrid” at UCLA, and application to PWFA; space-charge dominated beam and cathode/near cathode physics; the study of advanced IFEL systems, for very high energy gain and utilization of novel OAM modes; the physcis of inverse Compton scattering (ICS), with applications to e+ production and γγ colliders; electron diffraction; and advanced beam diagnostics using coherent imaging techniques. These subjects are addressed under the leadership of PBPL director Prof. James Rosenzweig in Task A, and Prof. Pietro Musumeci in Task J, which was initiated following his OHEP Outstanding Junior Investigator award.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
DOE OSTI2024

On the effect of strain rate during the cyclic compressive loading of liquid crystal elastomers and their 3D printed lattices

Nematic liquid crystal elastomers (LCEs) are a unique class of network polymers with the potential for enhanced mechanical energy absorption and dissipation capacity over conventional network polymers because they exhibit both conventional viscoelastic behavior and soft-elastic behavior (nematic director changes under shear loading). This additional inelastic mechanism makes them appealing as candidate damping materials in a variety of applications from vibration to impact. The lattice structures made from the LCEs provide further mechanical energy absorption and dissipation capacity associated with packing out the porosity under compressive loading. Understanding the extent of mechanical energy absorption, which is the work per unit mass (or volume) absorbed during loading, versus dissipation, which is the work per unit mass (or volume) dissipated during a loading cycle, requires measurement of both loading and unloading response. Here, in this study, a bench-top linear actuator was employed to characterize the loading-unloading compressive response of polydomain and monodomain LCE polymers and polydomain LCE lattice structures with two different porosities (nominally, 62% and 85%) at both low and intermediate strain rates at room temperature. As a reference material, a bisphenol-A (BPA) polymer with a similar glass transition temperature (9 °C) as the nematic LCE (4 °C) was also characterized at the same conditions for comparing to the LCE polymers. Based on the loading-unloading stress-strain curves, the energy absorption and dissipation for each material at different strain rates (0.001, 0.1, 1, 10 and 90 s -1 ) were calculated with considerations of maximum stress and material mass/density. The strain-rate effect on the mechanical response and energy absorption and dissipation behaviors was determined. The energy dissipation ratio was also calculated from the resultant loading and unloading stress-strain curves. All five materials showed significant but different strain rate effects on energy dissipation ratio. The solid LCE and BPA materials showed greater energy dissipation capabilities at both low (0.001 s -1 ) and high (above 1 s -1 ) strain rates, but not at the strain rates in between. The polydomain LCE lattice structure showed superior energy dissipation performance compared with the solid polymers especially at high strain rates.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2024

Interim report for the International Muon Collider Collaboration (IMCC)

The International Muon Collider Collaboration (IMCC) [1] was established in 2020 following the recommendations of the European Strategy for Particle Physics (ESPP) and the implementation of the European Strategy for Particle Physics-Accelerator R&D Roadmap by the Laboratory Directors Group [2], hereinafter referred to as the the European LDG roadmap. The Muon Collider Study (MuC) covers the accelerator complex, detectors and physics for a future muon collider. In 2023, European Commission support was obtained for a design study of a muon collider (MuCol) [3]. This project started on 1st March 2023, with work-packages aligned with the overall muon collider studies. In preparation of and during the 2021-22 U.S. Snowmass process, the muon collider project parameters, technical studies and physics performance studies were performed and presented in great detail. Recently, the P5 panel [4] in the U.S. recommended a muon collider R&D, proposed to join the IMCC and envisages that the U.S. should prepare to host a muon collider, calling this their "muon shot". In the past, the U.S. Muon Accelerator Programme (MAP) [5] has been instrumental in studies of concepts and technologies for a muon collider.

Accelerator Physics (physics.acc-ph)↗