Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “PARADIGM”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2009

Effects of Frequency and Motion Paradigm on Perception of Tilt and Translation During Periodic Linear Acceleration

Previous studies have demonstrated an effect of frequency on the gain of tilt and translation perception. Results from different motion paradigms are often combined to extend the stimulus frequency range. For example, Off-Vertical Axis Rotation (OVAR) and Variable Radius Centrifugation (VRC) are useful to test low frequencies of linear acceleration at amplitudes that would require impractical sled lengths. The purpose of this study was to compare roll-tilt and lateral translation motion perception in 12 healthy subjects across four paradigms: OVAR, VRC, sled translation and rotation about an earth-horizontal axis. Subjects were oscillated in darkness at six frequencies from 0.01875 to 0.6 Hz (peak acceleration equivalent to 10 deg, less for sled motion below 0.15 Hz). Subjects verbally described the amplitude of perceived tilt and translation, and used a joystick to indicate the direction of motion. Consistent with previous reports, tilt perception gain decreased as a function of stimulus frequency in the motion paradigms without concordant canal tilt cues (OVAR, VRC and Sled). Translation perception gain was negligible at low stimulus frequencies and increased at higher frequencies. There were no significant differences between the phase of tilt and translation, nor did the phase significantly vary across stimulus frequency. There were differences in perception gain across the different paradigms. Paradigms that included actual tilt stimuli had the larger tilt gains, and paradigms that included actual translation stimuli had larger translation gains. In addition, the frequency at which there was a crossover of tilt and translation gains appeared to vary across motion paradigm between 0.15 and 0.3 Hz. Since the linear acceleration in the head lateral plane was equivalent across paradigms, differences in gain may be attributable to the presence of linear accelerations in orthogonal directions and/or cognitive aspects based on the expected motion paths.

Beaton, K. H.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Horizon Mission Methodology - A tool for the study of technology innovation and new paradigms

The Horizon Mission (HM) methodology was developed to provide a means of identifying and evaluating highly innovative, breakthrough technology concepts (BTCs) and for assessing their potential impact on advanced space missions. The methodology is based on identifying new capabilities needed by hypothetical 'horizon' space missions having performance requirements that cannot be met even by extrapolating known space technologies. Normal human evaluation of new ideas such as BTCs appears to be governed (and limited) by 'inner models of reality' defined as paradigms. Thus, new ideas are evaluated by old models. This paper describes the use of the HM Methodology to define possible future paradigms that would provide alternatives to evaluation by current paradigms. The approach is to represent a future paradigm by a set of new BTC-based capabilities - called a paradigm abstract. The paper describes methods of constructing and using the abstracts for evaluating BTCs for space applications and for exploring the concept of paradigms and paradigm shifts as a representation of technology innovation.

Anderson, John L.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Three Paradigms of Lunar Regolith Evolution

Integration of diverse datasets on the Moon may render some paradigms of lunar science either better-defended or vulnerable. We will consider three paradigms commonly used for understanding the processes of lunar regolith evolution in light of new and accumulated data. Our premise is that all data-sets should converge to a single interpretation if a concept or model is to be accepted as a paradigm. If a convergence is lacking, the paradigm needs fresh scrutiny. SteadyState: Lunar regolith evolution is currently understood in terms of comminution, agglutination, and replenishment as described by McKay and coworkers). Briefly, the model envisages continued micrometeoritic bombardment to comminute exposed soil particles to finer sizes while continued agglutination consumes finer sizes to produce larger constructional particles. Eventually, a balance between these two opposing processes achieves a steady state; soils at steady state maintain their mean grain size (M(sub z)). Episodic higher-energy impacts excavate fresh coarse material from below the soil cover, disturb the steady state, and restart the process to achieve a new steady state. It follows that the thickness of the regolith at any site would control the frequency of replenishment; indeed, the thickness of the regolith at Apollo landing sites was predicted by McKay et al. from the average M(sub z) of local soils. However, replenishment may come also from disintegrating boulders and cobbles at the lunar surface, and rates of comminution and agglutination may depend on the properties of target material. Regression between M(sub z) and I(sub s)/Fe(sup 0) (a measure of maturity or total surface exposure) of Apollo soils at different sites shows the following relations and estimated M(sub z) at a high maturity of I(sub s)/Fe(sup 0)= 100. It is possible that Apollo 12 and 15 sites have the thickest regolith and the Apollo 16 site has the thinnest. It is also possible that Apollo 12 and 15 basalts are comminuted faster than Apollo 16 highland rocks and Apollo 14 and 17 soils are products of mixed parentage. If a soil becomes continually finer as it matures until agglutination catches up, and if comminution is differential-dependent on the physical properties of the constituents, then the composition of the bulk soil has to match the composition of some "fulcrum" grain size fraction, say X Grain size fractions >X and <X will complement each other; their mass balance is the bulk soil. It appears that the 10-20-micron size fraction may be the fulcrum. In general, trace-element chemistry and IR reflectance spectra of this size fraction are closest to that of the bulk soil, regardless of maturity that is surprising. Disaggregated products of regolith breccias may also show similar relationships. If the 10-20 gm is the fulcrum (i.e., X as above) for many soil properties (e.g., major element composition, FMR, solar-wind-implanted elements), then this may be the ultimate mean grain size of lunar soils at steady state. However, different properties of soils may find steady states at different grain size fractions. The steady state of solar-wind-implanted elements, on the other hand, will climb up the grain-size scale as agglutinates transfer surface-correlated components into volume correlated components until a saturation level is reached or the rates of replenishment and implantation become equal. The same will be the case with vapor-deposited reduced metals as they too are incorporated inside constructional particles. Properties that are directly affected by soil-maturation processes will thus have different pathways of achieving steady states. Maturity, i.e., cumulative surface exposure, of lunar soils is best quantified by the amount of nanophase superparamagnetic Fe(sup 0) (np-Fe(sup 0)) normalized to Fe content (=I(sub s)/Fe(sup 0). The majority consensus (paradigm?) for the production of np-Fe(sup 0) is associated with the production of agglutinates. Because large doses of solar-wind H are implanted in all lunar soils upon exposure, any melting (e.g., during agglutinate production) triggers a chemical reduction of Fe-bearing minerals resulting in np-Fe(sup 0) production. The quantity of np-Fe(sup 0) is thus dependent on melting events, (i.e., exposure), and limited by the Fe content of the soil. All freshly produced np-Fe(sup 0) resides in agglutinitic glass, as new TEM images show. Apparently, the correction procedure developed by Lucey et al. to estimate the Fe content of the lunar surface from IR-reflectance spectra depends on accepting the above. However, the process of producing np-Fe(sup 0) may be physical rather than chemical. All np-Fe(sup 0) could be deposits from a vapor produced by micrometeoritic impact on lunar soils. If metal-O bonds in target phases are broken, O being "most volatile" will escape leaving an O-deficient vapor to facilitate the production of np-Fe(sup 0). If so, the quantity of np-Fe(sup 0) is dependent on the vaporizing events, (i.e., exposure), and limited by the efficiency of breaking metal-O bonds and the escape of 0. To the extent that strengths of metal-O bonds are dependent on the local crystal field, production of np-Fe(sup 0) may be limited by the mineral composition of target soils and not by their total Fe content. According to this model, vapor-deposited np-Fe(sup 0) should be found at any retentive sites on lunar soil grains. Indeed, TEM images show np-Fe(sup 0) on plagioclase and ilmenite. Incorporation of such pre-irradiated np-Fe(sup 0)-bearing grains into agglutinates may account for eventual increased emplacement of np-Fe(sup 0) in agglutinates. Such a paradigm shift in understanding the origin of np-Fe(sup 0) will raise questions ranging from the unquestionable use of Is/FeO as the universal maturity parameter of lunar soils to global elemental maps of the Moon from remote-sensing data. Additional information is contained in the original.

Basu, A.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Aerodynamic Shape Optimization Using A Combined Distributed/Shared Memory Paradigm

Current parallel computational approaches involve distributed and shared memory paradigms. In the distributed memory paradigm, each processor has its own independent memory. Message passing typically uses a function library such as MPI or PVM. In the shared memory paradigm, such as that used on the SGI Origin 2000 machine, compiler directives are used to instruct the compiler to schedule multiple threads to perform calculations. In this paradigm, it must be assured that processors (threads) do not simultaneously access regions of memory in such away that errors would occur. This paper utilizes the latest version of the SGI MPI function library to combine the two parallelization paradigms to perform aerodynamic shape optimization of a generic wing/body.

Cheung, Samson↗
NASA NTRS2004

An Enabling Technology for New Planning and Scheduling Paradigms

The Night Projects Directorate at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center is developing a new planning and scheduling environment and a new scheduling algorithm to enable a paradigm shift in planning and scheduling concepts. Over the past 33 years Marshall has developed and evolved a paradigm for generating payload timelines for Skylab, Spacelab, various other Shuttle payloads, and the International Space Station. The current paradigm starts by collecting the requirements, called ?ask models," from the scientists and technologists for the tasks that are to be scheduled. Because of shortcomings in the current modeling schema, some requirements are entered as notes. Next, a cadre with knowledge of vehicle and hardware modifies these models to encompass and be compatible with the hardware model; again, notes are added when the modeling schema does not provide a better way to represent the requirements. Finally, the models are modified to be compatible with the scheduling engine. Then the models are submitted to the scheduling engine for automatic scheduling or, when requirements are expressed in notes, the timeline is built manually. A future paradigm would provide a scheduling engine that accepts separate science models and hardware models. The modeling schema would have the capability to represent all the requirements without resorting to notes. Furthermore, the scheduling engine would not require that the models be modified to account for the capabilities (limitations) of the scheduling engine. The enabling technology under development at Marshall has three major components: (1) A new modeling schema allows expressing all the requirements of the tasks without resorting to notes or awkward contrivances. The chosen modeling schema is both maximally expressive and easy to use. It utilizes graphical methods to show hierarchies of task constraints and networks of temporal relationships. (2) A new scheduling algorithm automatically schedules the models without the intervention of a scheduling expert. The algorithm is tuned for the constraint hierarchies and the complex temporal relationships provided by the modeling schema. It has an extensive search algorithm that can exploit timing flexibilities and constraint and relationship options. (3) An innovative architecture allows multiple remote users to simultaneously model science and technology requirements and other users to model vehicle and hardware characteristics. The architecture allows the remote users to submit scheduling requests directly to the scheduling engine and immediately see the results. These three components are integrated so that science and technology experts with no knowledge of the vehicle or hardware subsystems and no knowledge of the internal workings of the scheduling engine have the ability to build and submit scheduling requests and see the results. The immediate feedback will hone the users' modeling skills and ultimately enable them to produce the desired timeline. This paper summarizes the three components of the enabling technology and describes how this technology would make a new paradigm possible.

Jaap, John↗
NASA NTRS2004

Enabling a New Planning and Scheduling Paradigm

The Flight Projects Directorate at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center is developing a new planning and scheduling environment and a new scheduling algorithm to enable a paradigm shift in planning and scheduling concepts. Over the past 33 years Marshall has developed and evolved a paradigm for generating payload timelines for Skylab, Spacelab, various other Shuttle payloads, and the International Space Station. The current paradigm starts by collecting the requirements, called "tasks models," from the scientists and technologists for the tasks that they want to be done. Because of shortcomings in the current modeling schema, some requirements are entered as notes. Next a cadre with knowledge of vehicle and hardware modifies these models to encompass and be compatible with the hardware model; again, notes are added when the modeling schema does not provide a better way to represent the requirements. Finally, another cadre further modifies the models to be compatible with the scheduling engine. This last cadre also submits the models to the scheduling engine or builds the timeline manually to accommodate requirements that are expressed in notes. A future paradigm would provide a scheduling engine that accepts separate science models and hardware models. The modeling schema would have the capability to represent all the requirements without resorting to notes. Furthermore, the scheduling engine would not require that the models be modified to account for the capabilities (limitations) of the scheduling engine. The enabling technology under development at Marshall has three major components. (1) A new modeling schema allows expressing all the requirements of the tasks without resorting to notes or awkward contrivances. The chosen modeling schema is both maximally expressive and easy to use. It utilizes graphics methods to show hierarchies of task constraints and networks of temporal relationships. (2) A new scheduling algorithm automatically schedules the models without the intervention of a scheduling expert. The algorithm is tuned for the constraint hierarchies and the complex temporal relationships provided by the modeling schema. It has an extensive search algorithm which can exploit timing flexibilities and constraint and relationship options. (3) A web-based architecture allows multiple remote users to simultaneously model science and technology requirements and other users to model vehicle and hardware characteristics. The architecture allows the users to submit scheduling requests directly to the scheduling engine and immediately see the results. These three components are integrated so that science and technology experts with no knowledge of the vehicle or hardware subsystems and no knowledge of the internal workings of the scheduling engine have the ability to build and submit scheduling requests and see the results. The immediate feedback will hone the users' modeling skills and ultimately enable them to produce the desired timeline. This paper summarizes the three components of the enabling technology and describes how this technology would make a new paradigm possible.

Jaap, John↗
NASA NTRS1993

The maturing of the quality improvement paradigm in the SEL

The Software Engineering Laboratory uses a paradigm for improving the software process and product, called the quality improvement paradigm. This paradigm has evolved over the past 18 years, along with our software development processes and product. Since 1976, when we first began the SEL, we have learned a great deal about improving the software process and product, making a great many mistakes along the way. Quality improvement paradigm, as it is currently defined, can be broken up into six steps: characterize the current project and its environment with respect to the appropriate models and metrics; set the quantifiable goals for successful project performance and improvement; choose the appropriate process model and supporting methods and tools for this project; execute the processes, construct the products, and collect, validate, and analyze the data to provide real-time feedback for corrective action; analyze the data to evaluate the current practices, determine problems, record findings, and make recommendations for future project improvements; and package the experience gained in the form of updated and refined models and other forms of structured knowledge gained from this and prior projects and save it in an experience base to be reused on future projects.

Basili, Victor R.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Perspectives on Emerging/Novel Computing Paradigms and Future Aerospace Workforce Environments

The accelerating pace of the computing technology development shows no signs of abating. Computing power reaching 100 Tflop/s is likely to be reached by 2004 and Pflop/s (10(exp 15) Flop/s) by 2007. The fundamental physical limits of computation, including information storage limits, communication limits and computation rate limits will likely be reached by the middle of the present millennium. To overcome these limits, novel technologies and new computing paradigms will be developed. An attempt is made in this overview to put the diverse activities related to new computing-paradigms in perspective and to set the stage for the succeeding presentations. The presentation is divided into five parts. In the first part, a brief historical account is given of development of computer and networking technologies. The second part provides brief overviews of the three emerging computing paradigms grid, ubiquitous and autonomic computing. The third part lists future computing alternatives and the characteristics of future computing environment. The fourth part describes future aerospace workforce research, learning and design environments. The fifth part lists the objectives of the workshop and some of the sources of information on future computing paradigms.

Noor, Ahmed K.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Translational Vestibulo-Ocular Reflex and Motion Perception During Interaural Linear Acceleration: Comparison of Different Motion Paradigms

The neural mechanisms to resolve ambiguous tilt-translation motion have been hypothesized to be different for motion perception and eye movements. Previous studies have demonstrated differences in ocular and perceptual responses using a variety of motion paradigms, including Off-Vertical Axis Rotation (OVAR), Variable Radius Centrifugation (VRC), translation along a linear track, and tilt about an Earth-horizontal axis. While the linear acceleration across these motion paradigms is presumably equivalent, there are important differences in semicircular canal cues. The purpose of this study was to compare translation motion perception and horizontal slow phase velocity to quantify consistencies, or lack thereof, across four different motion paradigms. Twelve healthy subjects were exposed to sinusoidal interaural linear acceleration between 0.01 and 0.6 Hz at 1.7 m/s/s (equivalent to 10 tilt) using OVAR, VRC, roll tilt, and lateral translation. During each trial, subjects verbally reported the amount of perceived peak-to-peak lateral translation and indicated the direction of motion with a joystick. Binocular eye movements were recorded using video-oculography. In general, the gain of translation perception (ratio of reported linear displacement to equivalent linear stimulus displacement) increased with stimulus frequency, while the phase did not significantly vary. However, translation perception was more pronounced during both VRC and lateral translation involving actual translation, whereas perceptions were less consistent and more variable during OVAR and roll tilt which did not involve actual translation. For each motion paradigm, horizontal eye movements were negligible at low frequencies and showed phase lead relative to the linear stimulus. At higher frequencies, the gain of the eye movements increased and became more inphase with the acceleration stimulus. While these results are consistent with the hypothesis that the neural computational strategies for motion perception and eye movements differ, they also indicate that the specific motion platform employed can have a significant effect on both the amplitude and phase of each.

Beaton, K. H.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Automation of learning-set testing - The video-task paradigm

Researchers interested in studying discrimination learning in primates have typically utilized variations in the Wisconsin General Test Apparatus (WGTA). In the present experiment, a new testing apparatus for the study of primate learning is proposed. In the video-task paradigm, rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) respond to computer-generated stimuli by manipulating a joystick. Using this apparatus, discrimination learning-set data for 2 monkeys were obtained. Performance on Trial 2 exceeded 80 percent within 200 discrimination learning problems. These data illustrate the utility of the video-task paradigm in comparative research. Additionally, the efficient learning and rich data that were characteristic of this study suggest several advantages of the present testing paradigm over traditional WGTA testing.

Washburn, David A.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Paradigms for machine learning

Five paradigms are described for machine learning: connectionist (neural network) methods, genetic algorithms and classifier systems, empirical methods for inducing rules and decision trees, analytic learning methods, and case-based approaches. Some dimensions are considered along with these paradigms vary in their approach to learning, and the basic methods are reviewed that are used within each framework, together with open research issues. It is argued that the similarities among the paradigms are more important than their differences, and that future work should attempt to bridge the existing boundaries. Finally, some recent developments in the field of machine learning are discussed, and their impact on both research and applications is examined.

Schlimmer, Jeffrey C.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Organizations, Paradigms, and People: The Challenge of KM Interventions

This paper presents viewgraphs on Knowledge Management (KM) and how these interventions are put into practice by organizations and society. The topics include: 1) The Multiple Paradigm Tool; 2) Four Paradigms: tool for the Analyzing Organizations; 3) Assumptions About the Nature of Social Science; 4) Assumptions About the Nature of Society; 5) Schools of Sociological and Organizational Theory; 6) Meaning and Metaphors in the Four Paradigms; and 7) Possibilities and Conclusions.

Bailey, Teresa↗
NASA NTRS2003

Comparing the OpenMP, MPI, and Hybrid Programming Paradigm on an SMP Cluster

Clusters of SMP (Symmetric Multi-Processors) nodes provide support for a wide range of parallel programming paradigms. The shared address space within each node is suitable for OpenMP parallelization. Message passing can be employed within and across the nodes of a cluster. Multiple levels of parallelism can be achieved by combining message passing and OpenMP parallelization. Which programming paradigm is the best will depend on the nature of the given problem, the hardware components of the cluster, the network, and the available software. In this study we compare the performance of different implementations of the same CFD benchmark application, using the same numerical algorithm but employing different programming paradigms.

Jost, Gabriele↗
NASA NTRS2004

Fuzzy Hybrid Deliberative/Reactive Paradigm (FHDRP)

This work aims to introduce a new concept for incorporating fuzzy sets in hybrid deliberative/reactive paradigm. After a brief review on basic issues of hybrid paradigm the definition of agent-based fuzzy hybrid paradigm, which enables the agents to proceed and extract their behavior through quantitative numerical and qualitative knowledge and to impose their decision making procedure via fuzzy rule bank, is discussed. Next an example performs a more applied platform for the developed approach and finally an overview of the corresponding agents architecture enhances agents logical framework.

Sarmadi, Hengameth↗
NASA NTRS2007

Changing the Cultural Paradigm to Meet Emerging Requirements

This viewgraph presentation reviews changes that are required in Space Transportation. This new transportation paradigm from the reliance on the Space Shuttle to a mixture of space transportation vehicles, i.e., the Russian Progress, vehicle, the Japanese HTV, the European ATV and other commercial orbital transportation systems, requires a new cultural paradigm. This new paradigm is outlined, and reviewed.

Robbins, William W.↗
NASA NTRS2020

Broadening JPL’s Mission Formulation Paradigm with Human Centered Design

Within NASA’s highly competitive environment for funding, Human Centered Design (HCD) and cybernetics could provide advantages to proposers during the mission formulation phase. Opportunities are limited when it comes to funding new science missions. Proposers are challenged to make a compelling case about the scientific desirability, technical feasibility, and resource viability of their concepts. Organizations follow established processes for proposal development using teams that typically include scientists, engineers, and managers. These team members are highly experienced subject matter experts (SME) in their own disciplines, and can respond to requirements from the solicitation. However, they are typically not trained as designers and communicators. Their approach is rooted within NASA’s science and technology paradigm. How can we improve the proposal development process, refine workflow between team members, and deliver clear and appealing offerings to the stakeholders and evaluators? These questions have been addressed by today’s most innovative companies (e.g., Apple, Google, 3M, Dyson), where the design process is not limited simply to engineering and management, but involves an all-encompassing approach drawing from fields such as social sciences, design, and the arts. Like these commercial enterprises, NASA currently employs systems thinking and integrated design, but can benefit further by moving beyond its current practices, which are mostly driven by rigid engineering, technology, science, and project management considerations. At JPL’s Innovation Foundry and through the Solar System Mission Formulation Office, we broadened this paradigm by including HCD in the mission formulation workflow. Our goal was to create a proposal with improved clarity and appeal, thus helping our team to communicate its message and aid evaluators with their work. In this paper we provide examples and lessons learned from our recent proposal development effort using HCD. We discuss touch points where we infused non-linear designerly approaches and cybernetic circularity into the workflow. Implemented design topics include operational design for team building; process design throughout distinct phases of the proposal development and writing process; communication design for streamlined exchange of information within the team and to stakeholders; interaction design; graphic design; and creating boundary objects. While these approaches may feel new or foreign to SMEs and managers in the aerospace community, they produced significant benefits in this mission formulation effort. We will describe how such approaches can be used to broaden NASA’s technology-driven paradigm through design, thus creating an environment which fosters innovation, improved communication, and strategic advantage for proposers and their organizations.

Turner, Neal↗
DOE OSTI2024

The PARADIGM Project: Case Study in Balancing Experiment Uncertainty with Design simplicity

Accurate nuclear data are required for simulations of many applications including nuclear criticality safety. Actinide nuclear data at intermediate energies (from 1 to 100s of keV) are imprecise and inaccurate, because of scarce differential data, and an insufficient theory approach to capture the structures expected in the data to yield evaluated nuclear data, and lack of integral data for proper validation. This is a known deficiency but has proved challenging to address. More specifically, only 5% of integral experiments in the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP) benchmark suite address intermediate energies (Fig. 1). Associated calculated effective multiplication factor, k eff , values for these experiments are far outside the experimental uncertainties and are 25× further from experiment than for fast energies. These differences could either stem from systematic biases in nuclear data, experiments or both. The goal of the PARADIGM (PARallel Approach of Differential and InteGral Measurements) project is to significantly reduce (by more than tens of percent) the uncertainties of intermediate energy actinide nuclear data. The PARADIGM project designed and intends to execute LANSCE (Los Alamos Neutron Science CEnter) and NCERC (National Criticality Experiments Research Center) intermediate experiments in parallel. They will specifically address a high priority nuclear data need—reducing bias and uncertainty in intermediate plutonium nuclear data. The two experiment will achieve that by informing each other and nuclear theory. By doing all these steps in parallel, the timeline to deliver improved nuclear data to users will significantly be reduced. This work will focus on the integral experiment final design and the balance of design and modeling simplicity while minimizing experiment uncertainty.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
NASA NTRS1989

Vortex paradigm for shock-accelerated density-stratified interfaces

Numerical simulations are reported that capture the observations of Haas and Sturtevant (1985) when a planar shock accelerates an inclined planar interface between two media. A vortex paradigm is presented for interpreting the evolution of shock-accelerated density-stratified interfaces beyond early times. The simulations illustrate the paradigm and are in good agreement with the results of Haas and Sturtevant. Color images of space-time diagrams of the one-space integrated vorticity function are given to show the primary and secondary features of the emerging vortex structures.

Hawley, John F.↗