BEE-spoke-data/govdocs1-by-extension huggingface dataset:
# Presentation: 804060

## pp-pileup in MDC4 

- Jan Balewski, IUCF
- Star Analysis Meeting
-  May 13, 2001 , BNL

-  Goals
-  MDC4 statistics
-  vertex finder performance (ppLMV)
-  leading particle recon efficiency

## MDC4   overview

-  **100,000  pp events processed**
-  PYTHI 6.1, minbias, nondiffractive
-  GSTAR with y2001 (actual) geometry
-  8 pileup events added
-  root4star --> ppDST
-  ‘spin sorted’ -distributions  for  rLP

**Resources***** ****  *MDC4=1 hour of STAR
-  CPU  : 50 sec/event
-   total 1400 hours CPU
-  1000 jobs  with 100 events
-  2 days on 100 CPU  (real time)

- _Small problems of MDC4:_
-  crash after ~400 eve   fixed
-  SVT crash on empty eve  fixed
-  root crash after 15,000 eve  fixed
-  root version RCF vs. PDSF  recompiled
-  NFS problem corrupted DST  rerun

*Thanks to  Yuri, Lidia, Helen*
*and all other for  help*

## MDC4:  pp  event  topology in 2001

- 12 primary tracks,
- ~30 TPC tracks

- PYTHIA minbias trigger event,
- generated at s=200 GeV

- X

- Y

- Track color encodes its transverse momentum (GeV/c)

- Leading Particle

- L=4•1030 cm-2 s-1, NON  DIF =28 mb
**Collision  rate  = 120 KHz**
- 60 bunches/ring  213 nsec
- 1 coll/50 bunches = 1 coll/10 sec
- 40 sec TPC drift  **8 coll/ TPC frame**
- pileup  **few 100 tracks in TPC**
- diamond total width of ± 15 cm

- 104

- Leading Particle pT  (GeV/c)

- Total 105 events
- ( 1 hour of STAR)

- minbias
- trigger

## MDC4:  Vertex finder (ppLMV)

- with 8 pileup’s /event
- (without  pileup in green)

- RMS=4.7 mm
-          (3.2 mm)
- ‘efficiency’=96%  (90%)
- signal/noise =5/2  (68/1)

- Vertex  Z  (cm)

- Vertex  X  (cm)

- RMS=4.3 mm
-          (3.2 mm)

- Z  (cm)

- Only TPC tracks used

- RMS=6.7 cm
- generated =7.5 cm

## MDC4:  Efficiency of  ppLMV vs.  LP pT

- with 8 pileup’s /event

- Vertex  Z  (cm)

- Only TPC tracks used

- Leading Particle pT <1 GeV/c
- RMS=5.1 mm
- signal/noise =5/2

-  pT =[1,2] GeV/c
- RMS=3.9 mm
- signal/noise =6/1

-  pT =[2,3] GeV/c
- RMS=3.3 mm
- signal/noise =9/1

- Vertex  Z  (cm)

## MDC4:  Reconstructed  LP vs.  

- MDC4:  Reconstructed  LP vs.  

**With 8 pileup’s**  per event
- (no SVT)

**No pileup**
- (no SVT)

- problem

-  of recon LP  (deg)

-  of recon LP  (deg)

- GeV/c

- GeV/c

- GeV/c

- GeV/c
# Presentation: 320227

## Slide 1

## Slide 2

## Slide 3

## Slide 4

## Slide 5

## Slide 6

## Degree of Polarization (December)

## Degree of Polarization (April)

## Slide 9

## Slide 10

## Slide 11

## Slide 12

## Slide 13

## Slide 14

## Slide 15

## Slide 16

## 0.00

- 3.00

- 2.00

- 1.00

- SeaWiFS
- Chl *a*

## AOD(865)

*nLw*(443)

- 0

- 0.5

- 2

- 0

- SeaWiFS

## MODIS

- SeaWiFS

*nLw*(443)

## MODIS nLw(551)

- M

- S

## MODIS nLw(551)

## MODIS nLw(443)

- M

- S

## Slide 23

## Slide 24

## 1.30

- 0.80

- 1.05

- MODIS

- SeaWiFS

## AOD(865)

- 0.50

- 0.00

- 0.25

- MODIS

- SeaWiFS

## Slide 27

## Slide 28

## nLw(412) Apr. Quality “All”

*nLw*(412) Apr. Quality “All”

## nLw(412) Jun. Quality “All”

*nLw*(412) Jun. Quality “All”

## nLw(551) Apr. Quality “All”

*nLw*(551) Apr. Quality “All”

## nLw(551) Jun. Quality “All”

*nLw*(551) Jun. Quality “All”

## Slide 33

## Slide 34

## Slide 35
# Presentation: 691178

## A Consistent, Long Term Commitment to Technology Investment Is Required

***A Consistent, Long Term Commitment to ******Technology Investment Is Required***

**Space launch systems are based on the technological breakthroughs of the 1950s and early 60s**
**The U.S. has never consistently invested in space launch technology,  resulting in several “false starts”:**
- National Aerospace Plane
- X-33
**A coordinated, National effort is required**
**The investment portfolio must balance:**
- Near and far term capabilities
- Ground and flight demonstrations

## NASA’s New Integrated Space Transportation Plan (ISTP)

***NASA’s New Integrated Space Transportation Plan (ISTP)***

***Space Shuttle Life***
***Extension Upgrades***

***Orbital Space Plane (OSP)***

***Next Generation Launch***
***Technology (NGLT)***

***•******	******ISS Crew Rescue by 2010***
***•  ******	******ISS Crew Transfer by 2012***

***•  ******	******Enabling Future National Launch Capabilities***

## As NASA’s Integrated Investment in Space Launch Technology, NGLT is:

***As NASA’s Integrated Investment in Space Launch Technology, NGLT is:***

**Enabling NASA to Greatly Expand the Scientific and Human Exploration of Space**
**Enabling the U.S. to Regain Commercial Launch Vehicle Market Share and to Open New Markets**
**Supporting our Country’s National Security Needs**
**Promoting a Healthy Aerospace Workforce**
- Reinvigorating Aerospace Industry R&D
- Reenergizing Engineering & Science Education

***...... ******As Only NASA Can***

## High Leverage, Cross-Cutting Technologies for Any Future Launch System

**Low Cost Range**
**Tracking System**

**Boost and 2nd Stage **
**Engines**

**All-Weather, Durable Thermal**
**Protection Systems**

**“****All Electric” Subsystems**

**Lightweight, Durable**
**Airframes and Tanks**

**Non-Toxic Auxiliary**
**Propulsion**

**Intelligent, Self Diagnosing &**
**Correcting Systems**

***High Leverage, Cross-Cutting Technologies for Any Future Launch System***

**Rapid Checkout**
**and Launch Systems**
**@ Spaceports**

**ELV Upgrades**

**Shuttle Life Extension**

**New Reusable **
**Launch Vehicles**

**Exploration**

**Crew Safety**
# Presentation: 824107

## HIPAA Transactions and Code Sets – Where Are We Today?

- Stanley Nachimson
- Office of HIPAA Standards
- Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services

## One Deadline Passed, Several to Go

- Privacy deadline was April 14
- Transactions deadline is October 16
- Security deadline is April 20, 2005

## Transactions Implementation – Where Should We Be

- Vendors/Clearinghouses
- Should have delivered, or should be operating, HIPAA compliant solutions
- Providers
- Should have all software upgrades
- Should be completing testing with health plans/trading partners/business associates for all transactions.

## Transactions Implementation – Where Should We Be

- Health Plans
- Should have testing scheduled and nearing completion with trading partners/providers/business associates for all transactions.
- CMS
- Should be doing outreach and providing guidance for all entities on compliance.(We are.)

## How Will CMS Enforce the Transaction Standards

- Our goal is to assure that all entities are compliant
- Enforcement procedure will be:
- Complaint based
- Designed to resolve complaints and move entities into compliance via corrective action
- Monetary penalties as last resort.

## Enforcement

- Past actions which indicate due diligence and reasonable efforts to achieve compliance will be favorably considered
- Willingness to achieve compliance will be favorably considered

## Compliance Guidance

- Issued July 24
- October 16 is still the deadline for compliance, but CMS will use 1176(b) enforcement flexibility
- CMS will not impose penalties on covered entities deploying contingency plans onand after October 16 if:
- Reasonable and diligent efforts to become compliant
- Reasonable efforts by health plans to facilitate trading partner compliance

## Guidance

- What are contingency plans?
- Used to continue smooth flow of payments
- Examples:
- Health plans continue to process pre-HIPAA electronic transactions

## Guidance

- What are reasonable and diligent efforts?
- Possible examples:
- Outreach
- Expansive testing
- Signed agreements with vendors and periodic monitoring indicated deadline should have been met

## Guidance

- We will consider each situation on a case-by-case basis
- We will continue to monitor the covered entity to ensure that they are continuing to make progress towards compliance
- October 16 is the deadline, and as we move further from the date our “flexibility” will decrease.

## Medicare Electronic Billing Regulation

- Published 8/15
- Requires claims submitted by providers to **Medicare **be done so electronically except for:
- Small providers
-  Roster billing for vaccinations; Medicare demonstration projects; Dental claims
- Claims when more than one primary payer to Medicare
- Other future circumstances as determined by the Secretary
# Presentation: 186914

## Report from Working Group #2Strategy of GV Products

## General Comments

- Lessons learned from TRMM should be applied to GPM
- TRMM GV/AlgDev did not interface well enough
- What worked, what didnt?
- What are the applications?
- Satellite products
- NWP
- Data assimilation
- Hydrology
- What minimum set of products is necessary to validate the applications?
- Should avoid a laundry list of un-needed GV products
- Recommend that we combine output from WG2/WG3 to provide a useful/detailed list of needed/desired GV products.
- Develop a template of GV products that Users need

## General Comments, continued

- Intermediate scales (e.g. 3-hourly, daily) are also useful for some users
- GPM era: Concentrate on instantaneous or other temporal scales?
- Have to synthesize the GV data at the supersites, at satellite scale, for validation
- Challenge is to determine error characteristics of the hybrid or synthesized data

## Users

- GPM  Product

- Synthesized
- error characteristics

**Forward model -> synthetic sat-obs or “best-obs”**
**Synthesized (hybrid) @ satellite scale?**
**GV Data**

- Intra-sat error char.
- Mean difference
- Calibration uncertainty
- Distribution of values
- Error Covariances

## Incentives to do GV for “free”

- GPM is a good thing
- Some GV products have other important applications
- Ex: distribution of rain intensities
- Validate applicability of products to local area, etc.
- Scientific exchange
- International collaboration
- Adddesses solid precip, light rain, over-ocean
- Life and property (extreme weather events)

## Product List

- See enclosed Excel file  gv_prod_8sep05.xls
- From Cifelli et al. (Trade Study led by M. Schwaller)
# Presentation: 711179

## Landsat H (8) Long-Term Acquisition Plan

- Samuel N. Goward – UMD
- Darrel  L. Williams – NASA/GSFC
- Andrew Macatee - UMD

## L7 – LTAP

- 1993 Beginning for 1998 Launch
- Finished 1999
- Validation 2000-2002
- SLC failure
- Validation Lessons Learned
- LTAP-5, LTAP-7, LTAP-8

## Validation Outcomes Summary

**Seasonality**
- Good global coverage on quarterly basis
- Regional coverage needs adjustment
- Excessive deserts and winter high latitudes
- Excessive tropical cloud cover
- Not enough boreal forest growing season

**Radiometry**
- Fourth generation gain change approach
- Change solar zenith angle threshold to 75o from 85o in Northern Hemisphere

**Cloud Avoidance**
- 25% reduced cloud contamination in archive imagery
- ACCA within 10%, 95% of the time
- NOAA NCEP predicts and ACCA agree best at high (>80%) and low (<20%) cloud cover
- Problems at land/water margins (e.g., coastal regions)

## Potential LTAP Enhancements

- Improve LTAP coverage
- Reduced desert and winter acquisitions
- Focused boreal and tropical forest acquisitions
- Consideration of image composite approaches
- Conversion of niches to campaigns
- Incorporate continuous variable seasonality (NDVI)
- Better use of LTAP decision making
- Include land mask for ACCA assessment, possibly for cloud predict application
- Consider Low-gain-only operations
- Gain changes more of a problem than a solution

## Cloud Contamination (L7 16-Day Temporal Repeat – Washington DC region, 2000)

- May 11

- May 27

- June 12

- June 28

- July 14

- July 30

## Cloud Contamination (L7 16-Day Temporal Repeat – Oregon region, 2000)

- May 19

- June 04

- June 20

- Aug 07

- July 22

- July 06
# Presentation: 787287

## Biological Treatment of Perchlorate at Low Concentrations in WaterBaldwin Park Operable UnitSan Gabriel Basin

- John G. Catts Ph.D.
- Harding Lawson Associates

## Treatability Study Objectives

- Treat water containing 50 to 100 ug/L perchlorate
- Treat water containing 4 to 6 mg/L nitrate
- Produce effluent with perchlorate of           18 ug/L or lower
- Test alternate source of microorganisms
- Assess potability of effluent

## Treatment Technology

- Attached-growth fluidized bed bioreactor
- Granular activated carbon
- Recycle capacity
- Carbon separation
- Feed system for nutrients (N and P)
- Feed system for organic substrate (ethanol)

## Slide 4

## Slide 5

## Slide 6

## Slide 7

## Slide 8

## Slide 9

## Slide 10

## Slide 11

## Slide 12

## Slide 13

## Conclusions

- Technology can treat low concentrations
- Treated water less than 4 ug/L perchlorate
- Treated water less than 0.1 mg/L nitrate
- Alternative microorganisms work
- Effluent could be potable with disinfection and filtration

## Additional Conclusions

- Observed preference for nitrate
- Ethanol input optimized to support growth but not detected in produced water
- Minimum phosphorus required
- Operating controls - redox potential and DO
- Retention time - adjusted by equipment configuration and recycle
- No VOC reduction products detected

## Phase 2 Treatability Study

- La Puente Valley County Water District
- Engineering data for scale up
- Rate between 500 and 1,000 gpm
- Disinfection
- Filtration
- Design in Summer 1998
- Startup in early 1999

## Contacts

- John Catts - HLA/BPOUSC                                                                                         	phone    (415) 899-8825                                                                                                                                                   	e-mail    jcatts@harding.com
- Mike Girard - Aerojet                                                                                                	phone    (916) 355-2945                                                                           	e-mail   michael.girard@aerojet.com
# Presentation: 532994

##                      
  CONTENTS:
Spacecraft Subsystem Status         
Solar arrays degradation
SSR Single Event Flag  counts
Remaining Fuel

H.Boithias,M.Chaloupy,H.Schweitzer,M.Verdant@ GSFC

**  ****CONTENTS:**
**Spacecraft Subsystem Status         **
**Solar arrays degradation**
**SSR Single Event Flag  counts**
**Remaining Fuel**
**                                                             **
**             ****	****	****	**** **
**	****                                                         ****	****	**
**H.Boithias,M.Chaloupy,H.Schweitzer,M.Verdant@ GSFC**
**                                                                                                  **

- +Z

- +Y

- +X

## Spacecraft status
Spacecraft is nominal.  
	There was no ESR for more than one year (the last one was Feb.5, 2002).
Power subsystem: nominal performance; the last major proton event, seen by the solar array, was Nov.2001; the degradation since is less than during the first 2 years. Present current margin: 13.3A
Data handling and attitude control:  nominal performance; 
Propulsion: Thruster performed nominally during the 3 maneuvers, performed since the last SWT.  Remaining fuel: about 120 kg.  Next maneuver is tentatively planned for mid June 2003. Propellant branch B is now activated every other week to directly read the pressure, rather than rely on temperature monitoring.
Thermal: all spacecraft temperatures are within limits. PLM temps average increased 0.5° during 2 years. Switching off the X-panel heaters Nov.2001 decreased the average temps by 0.5°.

**Spacecraft is nominal.  **
**	****There was no ESR for more than one year (the last one was Feb.5, 2002).**
**Power subsystem: nominal performance; the last major proton event, seen by the solar array, was Nov.2001; the degradation since is less than during the first 2 years. Present current margin: 13.3A**
**Data handling and attitude control:  nominal performance; **
**Propulsion: Thruster performed nominally during the 3 maneuvers, performed since the last SWT.  Remaining fuel: about 120 kg.  Next maneuver is tentatively planned for mid June 2003. Propellant branch B is now activated every other week to directly read the pressure, rather than rely on temperature monitoring.**
**Thermal: all spacecraft temperatures are within limits. PLM temps average increased 0.5° during 2 years. Switching off the X-panel heaters Nov.2001 decreased the average temps by 0.5°.**

## Slide 3

## Slide 4

## Slide 5

## Slide 6
# Presentation: 021574

## Response Robot Evaluation Exercise

- Organization:
- Email:
- Phone:
- =============================================================
- Attendee1: (for access, nametag, lunch, etc.)
- Name:
- Email:
- Phone:
- Hotel:
- _Attendee2: _(for access, nametag, lunch, etc.)
- Name:
- Email:
- Phone:
- Hotel:
- _Attendee3: _(for access, nametag, lunch, etc.)
- Name:
- Email:
- Phone:
- Hotel:

**Response Robot Evaluation Exercise**
**MD-TF1 Training Facility**
**Rockville, MD**
**August 19-21, 2006**
- _[www.isd.mel.nist.gov/us&r_robot_standards](http://www.isd.mel.nist.gov/us&r_robot_standards)_
**EXPECTED ATTENDEES **
# Presentation: 204087

## wild bergamot 

_*Monarda*_  * *_*fistulosa*_*  *L.
- Other common names;  bee-balm, horse mint, mintleaf beebalm, bergamot, Oswego-tea.

**Food:**
- Used as a spicy herb seasoning in food preparation and brewed into a tea.
**Medicinally:**
- As a tea it was taken to treat colds, lung infections, flatulence, aching kidneys and stomachaches, induce sweat, alleviate acne problems, promote menstruation and lactation.
- As a poultice it was applied to relieve colds, fevers, headaches and sore eyes.
- It was used in sweat lodges so the steam would cure colds and lung problems.
- It was used in baby baths to keep the child healthy and smelling good.

- Photo courtesy of:  ©Jim Stasz. This copyrighted image may be freely used for any non-commercial purpose. For commercial use please contact _[Jim Stasz](mailto:jstasz@mncppc.state.md.us)_.  Please credit the artist, original publication if applicable, and the USDA-NRCS PLANTS Database. The following format is suggested and will be appreciated:  **Jim Stasz** @ USDA-NRCS PLANTS Database.

- Slide developed by Pat Broyles, Soil Conservationist, Manhattan, KS. PMC.  USDA is an equal opportunity employer.
# Presentation: 191796

## Figure 1:   ICD Single Channel Block Diagram Schematic

## Figure 2:  La Tech ICD Motherboard

## Figure 2a:  Picture of the production ICD Motherboard with inputs and outputs marked

## Figure 3:  Layout of ICD Crate Electronics and Motherboard

- 16 Light Tight Boxes containing Motherboards

## Figure 4:  High Voltage Supply Block Diagram

- Run I HV POD (X16)

- 8 Outputs
- @+1000-800 VDC

- MOD Maryland Box (X8)

- 48 channel output on
- Six 8-conductor Reynolds cables

- Old Maryland Box (X24)
- 1-to-1 Fanout

- SHV Cables  16 channels

- 1-to-3 HV Fanout Board  (shown in Figure 4a)

- Variable Resistors on output

- Individual FUSES on HV output tp PMTs  (see Figure 4a)

- To ICD Motherboard

- SHV Cable

## Figure 4a:  Circuit Diagram for the High Voltage Fanout Board

- Fuse

- Fuse

- Fuse

## Figure 5:  Low Voltage Power Supply Block Diagram

## Figure 5a:  Circuit Diagram for the Low Voltage Fanout Board

## Figure 6:  PMT LED Calibration Pulser Diagram

## Figure 7:  PreAmp Calibration Pulser Diagram

## Figure 8:  Plat Form Layout of ICD Racks

## Figure 9:  Inner Cryostat Detector System - ICD

- Notes:
- 1. There are 16 ICD Boxes for each End
-      with 12 Scintillator Tiles in each (gives
-      12x16=192 signal channels per end)
- 2. Connection from Tiles to ICD Crates is
-     through a 5m long Fiber Cable
- 3. There are 2  ICD Electronics Crates each
-      contains 16 ICD Electronics Boxes
- 4. Each ICD Electronics Box  handles 6 PMTs
-     (2  ICD Electronics boxes per Tile)

-         ICD Box
- (Contains 12 Tiles)

- D0 North End

- Face of  Endcap Calorimeter

- ICD Scintillator Tiles

- Fiber Cables

- ICD Crate

- Upper
- Cable Tray

- Lower
- Cable Tray

- LV Fanout Boxes

- Iron Boxes  ( surrounds PMTs)

- View Looking South

## Figure 10:  Expanded view of ICD Layout with dimensions.

**Figure 10:  Expanded view of ICD Layout with dimensions.**
# Presentation: 497482

## Single Stage to Orbit Space CraftHigh Flight

- NASA Glenn Academy 2006

## Objectives

- State of the Art
- Reasons for Previous Failures
- Benefits
- Engine Design
- Phases of flight
- Fuel
- Types
- Heat Exchangers
- Design of the Craft
- Materials
- Structure of the Aircraft
- Heat Shield
- Outreach

## Team Structure

**State of the Art**
- Ivan Rodriguez (Research/Benefits)
**Propulsion Team**
- Kat Coderre (Engine)
- Chris Leitenberger (Engine)
- Kelly Perry (Fuel)
- Kathryn Johnson (Fuel)
- Will Minton (Fuel)

**Vehicle Design Team**
- Frank Centinello (Craft Design)
- Kathryn Johnson (Materials)
- Will Minton (Materials)
- Megan Warner (Materials)
**Outreach**
- Everyone

## TimelineCompleted by the following dates

- Sunday 6/18:
- Background Research Completed
- Benefits Outlined
- Outreach Elements Planned Out
- Sunday 6/25:
- Preliminary Design of Engine
- Fuels
- Sunday 7/2:
- Preliminary Design of Craft
- Sunday 7/9:
- Midterms

- Sunday 7/16:
- Mass Gauging
- Heat Shield
- Sunday 7/23:
- Carrying out Outreach
- Sunday 7/30:
- Compilation
- Phases of Flight
- Sunday 8/6:
- Finals

## Publications/Conferences

- Composing a report
- With the intent of presenting to AIAA
- Investigate design competitions

## How Will We Accomplish This Project?

- Continuous documentation
- Interdisciplinary teams
- “Formal” Sunday meetings
- “Informal” Wednesday meetings
- Potential teleconferences

## Will It Continue After the Academy? 

- Yes. It is intended to be expanded upon by industry.
- University of Kansas may finalize the design of the engine and aircraft including 3D models.

## What Are the Benefits to NASA?

- To name a few:
- Efficient access to LEO
- Innovation is overdue
- Opens space travel to many more people
- Numerous other benefits to be outlined by June 18.
# Presentation: 535384

## x (m)

- difference counts

- x-ray modulation data from 7/24/02

- 200

- 250

- 300

- 350

- 400

- 450

- 500

- 550

- 600

- -10

- 0

- 10

- 20

- 30

- 40

- 50

## Emax=3E

- Emax=3E
- Emax=5E
- Emax=7E
- Emax=9E

## camshaft beam profiles from 08_09_02(horiz scans 2-3)

- -0.5

- -0.4

- -0.3

- -0.2

- -0.1

- 0

- 0.1

- 0.2

- 0.3

- 0.4

- 0.5

- 10

- -4

- 10

- -3

- 10

- -2

- 10

- -1

- 10

- 0

- x (mm)

- counts (norm.)

- camshaft beam profiles from 08_09_02(horiz scans 2-3)

## camshaft beam profiles from 08_09_02(horiz scans 2-3)

- counts (norm.)

- camshaft beam profiles from 08_09_02(horiz scans 2-3)

- 1 = 98 m
- 2 = 260 m
-   (x 0.0021)

## x (mm)

- counts (norm.)

- camshaft beam profiles from 08_09_02(horiz scans 2-3)

- 1 = 98 m
- 2 = 260 m
-   (x 0.0021)

- additional 100 m slit integ.

## x (mm)

- counts (norm.)

- Analytic Models of Beam Profiles

## x (mm)

- counts (norm.)

- Analytic Models of Beam Profiles

## energy modulation E/E

- 3.5

- 4

- 4.5

- 5

- 5.5

- 6

- 6.5

- 7

- 0

- 0.5

- 1

- 1.5

- 2

- 2.5

- energy modulation E/E

- fsec signal/background

## energy modulation E/E

- fsec signal/background

## energy modulation E/E

- fsec signal/background

## E/E

- E/E

- N

- Emax=3E
- Emax=5E
- Emax=7E
- Emax=9E

## x/x

- x/x

- N

- Emax=3E
- Emax=5E
- Emax=7E
- Emax=9E

## 0

- 20

- 40

- 60

- 80

- 100

- 120

- 140

- -1000

- -500

- 500

- 1000

- x/m

- difference counts

- Femtosecond x-ray profile at 1st Harmonic     8/10/02

## Slide 14

## Emax=3E

- Emax=3E
- Emax=5E
- Emax=7E
- Emax=9E

## 0

- 0.1

- 0.2

- 0.3

- 0.4

- 0.5

- 0.6

- 0.7

- 0.8

- 0.9

- -1000

- -500

- 500

- 1000

- x/m

- Signal/bkg ratio

- Femtosecond X-ray Signal/Bkg  at 1st Harmonic     8/10/02

## x/m

- Signal/bkg ratio

- Femtosecond X-ray Signal/Bkg  at 1st Harmonic     8/10/02

- 0

- 0.1

- 0.2

- 0.3

- 0.4

- 0.5

- 0.6

- 0.7

- 0.8

- 0.9

- 800

- 700

- 600

- 500

- 400

- 300

- 200

## x/m

- difference counts

- Femtosecond x-ray profiles at 3rd Harmonic     8/10/02

- x/m

## Slide 19
# Presentation: 268027

## Results of SFP Cultural Adaptations(Kumpfer, Alvarado, Smith, & Bellamy, Prevention Science, 2002 

- <date/time>

- Results of SFP Cultural Adaptations(Kumpfer, Alvarado, Smith, & Bellamy, Prevention Science, 2002

- Five SFP outcomes studies found:
- Recruitment and retention were significantly improved by about 40% for cultural adaptations
- Outcomes basically identical, but slightly worse if adaptation decreased fidelity

## Steps to Cultural Adaptation

- Hire Culturally-, Age-, Gender-competent Staff
- Develop Adaptation Team (inc. developer, clients, staff, and cultural consultants)
- Base adapations on cultural values or target population’s primary risk and protective factors.

*“**The best family and parenting programs are only as effective as the quality of the staff delivering the program.”*

## Steps to Cultural Adaptation

- Phase I:  Pilot Test First-Cut Adaptations
- Make changes in language, examples
- Omit culturally inappropriate material
- Phase II:  Deeper Adaptations
- Promote Ethnic Identify and Cultural Pride
- Add traditional stories, songs, dances, games, and values
- Hire attractive role models from ethnic commuity (e.g., elders, leaders). * *

## Steps to Cultural Adaptation

- Incorporate Traditional Ceremonies and Rites of Passage
- Blessing or prayer by spiritual leader
- A talking circle
- Traditional songs, music or dances
- Traditional food to share

## Steps to Cultural Adaptation

- Develop Matched Graphics
- Add visual graphics that include pictures of similar families
- Phase III:  Evaluation of Adapted Program
- Compare to less culturally adapted program in Phase I
- Examine attendance and outcome data
- Publish results
# Presentation: 534409

## TOGA radar Operations (Praia, São Tiago)

- Collaborative effort between Colorado State University,  University of Washington, and NASA WFF
- Key objective: Characterize the mesoscale circulation and accompanying precipitation & thermodynamic structures of convective systems associated with easterly waves, especially those embodying organized cyclonic flow features
- Coordinated DC-8 in situ (thermodynamic & microphysical) and dropsonde data are critical to place TOGA radar observations in context and to better understand the evolution of these systems

## Proposed DC-8 Sampling of Organized Convection Near TOGA

- Key NASA DC-8 Observations:
-  Dropsondes both within & external to precipitating regions
-  DSD and ice microphysical measurements
-  Aerosol measurements
-  PR-2 observations of vertical structure

## TOGA Radar Field of View in NAMMA

- Image courtesy of John Gerlach

- Best sampling available within ~100 km of TOGA radar; support for coordinated DC–8 ops could
- perhaps extend to ~200 km

- 100 km range
# Presentation: 520010

## “From the Ground Up:Balancing the NSF Astronomy Program”

- Senior Review Major Recommendations
- November 2006
- Interagency Implications

## Finding 1 - The Scientific Challenge

- NSF finds this the most important conclusion of the report:
- “Proper maintenance of current facilities while simultaneously developing and beginning operation of the proposed new facilities is infeasible under any reasonable expectations for federal budget support based on past funding levels. The cuts that are proposed to the existing program are as deep as possible without causing irreparable damage and will only allow a start to be made on new initiatives.”

## From the Conclusion

- “It should be emphasized that, in none of the proposed actions can the facilities targeted be seen as redundant to the scientific enterprise. Instead, the SR is recommending reduced AST funding or closure of some telescopes that could be unique and productive for 20 years.”
- “These findings, which go beyond the SR’s charge, may appear defeatist to some. However, the SR developed the more optimistic view that, with ***patience, cooperation and wise planning***, it will be possible to realize the promise of the next generation of major observatories.”

## Executive SummaryRadio-millimeter-submillimeter Program 

## NRAO Transition Program

- Very Long Baseline Array
- Seek partners who will contribute personnel or financial support to the operations of the VLBA by 2011.
- Limit AST support to $3M, close if remaining costs are not found elsewhere.
- Reduction in operating costs of GBT
- Reduction in the cost of administrative support
- Reductions in scientific staff costs

## NAIC (Arecibo) Transition Program

- Taper to $8M per year AST support over next 3 years
- Concentrate on surveys
- ~20% time for individual PIs
- Assumes ATM support at ~$2M/yr continues
- Need to consider alternate operational models
- See cost review slides
- Seek other sources of support for operations
- By 2011, AST support limited to $4M.  If other support not sufficient to produce a viable operational model, recommends closure.
- Cornell plan closes planetary radar ~ Oct 2007

## Executive SummarySolar Program 

## NSO Transition Program

- NSO should:
- organize an orderly withdrawal of personnel and resources, including the SOLIS telescope, from Kitt Peak/Tucson and Sacramento Peak and start to close down operations at these sites as soon as ATST funding begins.
- consolidate its management and science into a single headquarters as soon as possible.
- Support of the Global Oscillations Network Group (GONG++) project should cease one year after the successful deployment of NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory, unless the majority of operations support is found from other sources.
# Presentation: 524419

## Mathematics and Science Teaching... What might looking below the surface entail seeing?

- Teaching is complex.                                 In complex practices                           there are a lot of different decision points; some things are unpredictable.
- A variety of teaching approaches can work.
- The point isn’t that *anything* goes- it depends on whether the teaching approach is helping kids learn mathematics or science.

**Archived Information**

## The Problem posed by the 3rd grade teacher

- Joshua ate 16 peas Monday and 32 peas on Tuesday. How many more peas did he eat on Tuesday than on Monday?

## Context of the Video Segment

- 3rd grade; November; immediately after lunch;
- Culturally, racially, linguistically heterogeneous class, half speak English as a second language, some limited English; high mobility in and out of this school.
- Although we see only a few children speak, participation is generally wide and shared across this and other class periods.
- In this lesson, students are working on subtraction with regrouping (i.e., “borrowing”). Their basic fact skills are good. Still, they sometimes make “bookkeeping errors”.
- The students had been taught the conventional way to solve a subtraction problem (i.e., “borrowing”) and were able to carry out this procedure.

## Bernadette’s work

-   Common Student error
-   92
- _- 65_
-   33

## Context of the video segment

- The students had used “bean sticks” to understand grouping by tens and the basic “trading” process that underlies the standard procedure.
- The teacher’s goals in using this lesson were to:  (1) 	let the students recognize how subtraction arises in a 	story context;                                                                (2) 	provide practice in using subtraction with regrouping 	in solving a problem; and                                           (3)	make the mathematical connections among the 		representations (conventional procedure,bean stick 	model, number line, other models or explanations)

## The Video Segment

- Approximately 7 minutes in length.
- We drop in on the lesson after the teacher has asked the students to read the problem. She has one student read it aloud, and then asks who can say what the problem is asking.

##    Focus Questions for viewing

**Group 1: Content focus**-What kinds of mathematical 		ideas and processes do you see? What 		might the students be learning here?
**Group 2: Student focus-**What are the students 		doing here? What can you say about their 		understanding of subtraction?
**Group 3: Environment focus-**How would you describe 		the environment for learning?
**Group 4: Teaching focus-** What do you think this 		teacher is doing to facilitate the students’ 		work? What might the teacher have had to 		teach students so that they could do what 		they are doing?
# Presentation: 532990

## MARINE ENGINEERING DIV.

**MARINE ENGINEERING DIV.**

**JAMIE LECOMPTE**
**PORT ENGINEER**
**CHARLESTON, SC**

## RONALD H. BROWN

**BUILT IN 1996.**
**ONE FOUR AGORS BUILT**
**T. THOMPSON, UNIV. WASHINGTON**
**R. REVELLE, SCRIPPS**
**ATLANTIS, WHOI**

## ANNUAL MAINTENANCE BUDGET

**NON DRYDOCK YEAR – $600K**
**DRYDOCK YEAR – $900K**

## PAST MODIFICATIONS

** ****DESH 5 WINCH RELOCATION**
** ****NEW VAN LOCATION, 02 LEVEL**
**   ****STARBOARD**

## MAJOR MAINTENANCE ACTIONS

**COMPLETE OVERHAUL OF THE Z DRIVES - 2005**
**OVERHAUL OF THE MAIN MOTORS – 2005**
**MAJOR OVERHAUL OF EVERY ENGINE**

## FY 2007 PLANNED WORK

**COMPLETE BOW THRUSTER OVERHAUL (210K)**
** ****ENGINE OVERHAULS(150K)**
** ****CRANE REPAIRS (100K)**
**HULL PRESEVATION (140K)**
**AFT DECK PRESERVATION (81K)**

## LIFE EXTENSION PROJECTS

**RENEWAL OF HIAB CRANES (125K EA.) **
**UPGRADE OF DPS SYSTEM (330K)**
**UPGRADE OF VESSEL CONTROL AND MONITORING SYSTEM (250K)**

## UNMET REQUESTS

**DPS SYSTEM UPGRADE**
**OTHER REQUESTS??**

## QUESTIONS??

**JAMIE LECOMPTE**
**NOAA PORT ENGINEER**
**PH: 843-566-9191**
**FX: 843-566-9121**
**EMAIL: jamie.a.lecompte@noaa.gov**
# Presentation: 731986

## LBNL Ergonomics Resources

-      **New Hire**
**or JHA trigger**
**     ****for Ergo**
**    ****Training?**

**      ****Move or **
**     ****change in **
**         ****job or **
**   ****equipment?**

**   ****EHS 59 Ergo **
** ****Self-assess for **
**Computer Users**
- A-Z Index >> Ergo
- Self-assessment for
- Computer Users
**EHS62 WorkSmart **
** **(material handling)** **
-    EH&S Training
- Website >> Monthly
- Training  Schedules
-   For schedule and
-     sign-up contact
**  ****Training Group  **
**      ****495-2228**
- For content or user
-      issues contact
**     ****Ergo Team **
**      ****486-5818**

**      ****Ergo Eval **
**or consultation **
**    ****for “at risk” **
**    ****conditions? **

**  ****Work-related**
**    ****Discomfort **
**      ****or Injury?**

**Need ergo **
**furniture or **
**equipment?**

**    ****Need **
**techniques **
**to improve **
**     ****ergo?**

**EHS 58 Ergo Self**
**-Assess Refresher**
- When you move
- or have job or
- equip changes,
- your HR data or JHA will be updated and prompt you to take this brief version of Ergo Self-assessment for Computer Users
**     ****For more info contact Ergo Team**
**    ****Ergo@lbl.gov**
**        ****486-5818**

**Contact your Ergo  Advocate or Safety Coordinator**
- If complex ergo risk, they will bump it up to...**        **
**Ergo Team      **
-  For Office/Computer settings: Mike White
-  at **486-5818**
-     For Labs, Material
-    Handling** **or Trades:
-   Ira Janowitz at
-  **486-6071**
** **
**For more info   contact Ergo Team **
**  ****Ergo@lbl.gov**
**  ****486-5818**

**Notify your supervisor**
**Contact Health **
**Services, B 26**
** ****486-6266**
-  **Ergo Evaluation **
**Request**
-    A-Z Index>>Ergo
-   Eval Request,
-   log in & select
-   Request My Eval
**      ****For more info**
** ****contact Ergo Team **
**    ****Ergo@lbl.gov**
**        ****486-5818**

**     ****Ergonomics **
**Products Catalog**
- Go to A-Z Index
- and search Ergo
- Product Catalog
**or**
- Contact Ergo Display
- room to schedule
- appointment to test
- ergo equipment or for
- chair fitting at Bldg.
- 75B Room 110c
-       **For more info **
**  ****contact Ergo Tech **
**     ****Jayson Martin**
**      ****Ergo@lbl.gov**
**         ****486-6848**

**1 Min 4 Safety slides**
-      Go to EH&S
-     Division website
-  >>EHS Quick Links
- >>1 Minute 4 Safety;
-      topics include
-  Laptop ergonomics
-  Keyboard & Mouse
-   techniques
- - Workload hazard
-   controls
-  Lab ergonomics
-  Ergo of lifting
**    ****For more info contact Ergo Team **
**    ****Ergo@lbl.gov**
**        ****486-5818**

**Yes**

**Yes**

**Yes**

**Yes**

**Yes**

**Yes**
# Presentation: 870508

## NIH/NIGMS Support of Structural Biology

**NIH individual research grants with crystallography projects (FY 98)**
**primary:  225 grants, $51M total costs**
**secondary:  400 grants, $96M total costs**
**NIGMS is 50% of each**
**NIH program projects and NCRR research resources:  approx. $30M for protein crystallography**

## NIGMS Initiative for Synchrotron Beamlines

**Beamline upgrades for benefit of general users**
**Reports on increasing demand for user access and beamline needs**
**Estimate of doubling of capacity for crystallographic experiments from staff increases and equipment upgrades**
**Letter to synchrotron facility directors inviting informal proposals **
**NIGMS synchrotron advisory group**
**FY99 funding of $7M from NIGMS**

## Synchrotron Beamline Upgrades Supported by NIGMS

**upgrades to 4 beamlines**
**CCD detectors**
**computer**
**wet lab**
**four beamline scientists/technicians**
**one staff for new review/scheduling process**
**$1,770K equipment**
**$705K annual – staff**

**Stanford Synchrotron Research Laboratory**

## Synchrotron Beamline Upgrades Supported by NIGMS

**reconstruction of bending magnet beamline**
**ncluding beamline optics, monochrometer, detector, crystallography station**
**four beamline scientists/technicians**
**$2,372K equipment/construction**
**$670K annual – staff**

**National Synchrotron Light Source**

## Synchrotron Beamline Upgrades Supported by NIGMS

**upgrades to three beamlines**
**beamline optics and cooling equipment, monochrometer, automation/ monitors, computer**
**two beamline scientists**
**$1,238K equipment**
**$340K annual – staff**

**Cornell High Energy Synchrotron Source**

## Synchrotron Beamline Upgrades Supported by NIGMS

**upgrade to the focusing optics for one beamline and a detector**
**low temperature system and computer for a new beamline**
**four beamline scientists/ technicians**
**$963K equipment**
**$259K annual – staff**

**Advanced Light Source**

## Synchrotron Beamline Construction Supported by NIGMS

**construction of a new crystallographic beamline**
**two beamline scientists**
**cofunded with the NSF, Louisiana State University, and a consortium of PIs in the southern U.S.**
**$1,260K construction/equipment (NIGMS & NSF)**
**$206K annual – staff (NIGMS & NSF)**

**Center for Advanced Microstructures and Devices**

## Synchrotron Beamline Construction Supported by NIGMS

**development of a new crystallographic sector of two crystallographic beamlines**
**partnership with the NCI **
**two years of NIGMS/NCI funding for construction.**
**$18M construction/equipment (NIGMS & NCI)**

**Advanced Photon Source**
# Presentation: 526471

## Steel Status

- Jim Kilmer
- October 7, 2005

## Steel Purchase

- Revisited welding vs whole frames
- Even counting welding labor it’s cheaper so we weld
- But welding has been minimized
- Plate will have mill surface finish and no surface protection
- During assembly plates will be deburred

## Steel Flatness

- Per Ron R. plates want to be better than 1/8” in flatness for physics
- Leave ~1/8” for fibers
- =>Gap between frames 1⁄4”
- Axial bolts will hold this spacing

## Minos axial bolt

## Flatness expectation

- Plates we expect to order are 84” and 96” wide
- Flatness at 1⁄2 ASTM spec is 5/16” over any 12 foot distance
- Parts are max 7+ feet long so plates in tolerance should be better that 3/16”in flatness
- From Minos experience plate should be better than this

## Flatness correction

- Quote for flattening is $70.00/segment
- Total for all segments $45.4 K
- Done only for segments out of spec

## Welding

- Welding technique critical to flatness
- Minimize the amount of weld used
- Use the strongback as a flat platten
- Clamp the steel segments to the strongback and leave until the welds cool

## Strongback

## WBS 1.8 summary

- Cost of OD steel updated
- Cost of stand and bookend updated
- Detailed design of strongback and small parts about to start
- Looking at Minos interferences

## Minerva in place 1

- Drip ceiling estimate is done
- Construction estimate is 4 weeks
- Significant Modifications required to Minos platform and infrastructure
- Need to plan ahead to allow both jobs to take place during the upcoming 13 week shutdown

## Minerva in place 2

## West side

## East side

## Minos Modifications required

- Move Minos power supply and cooling pumps
- Move lower HV rack and first upper and lower FE racks
- Move all lower level rack AC power conduit
- Modify walkway platform

## Wideband assembly area

## Wideband Door
# Presentation: 346633

## Observation of Solar Wind Charge Exchange Emission from Exospheric Material in Earth's Magnetosheath

- S. L. Snowden, M. R. Collier, T. Cravens, K. D. Kuntz, I. Robertson

-   Specifically planned XMM-Newton proposal to observe magnetosheath SWCX emission
-   Long (100 ks) observation at a dim part of the sky
-   Designed to test Robertson & Cravens magnetosheath emission model
-   SWCX emission observed in spite of lower solar wind flux

- Local Bubble and Beyond II – Philadelphia, PA – 21-24 April

## XMM_Newton Observation Geometry

- Maximum elongation of orbit towards Sun
- Look direction north through the magnetosheath close to the subsolar point.
- Tricky to combine low cosmic background and best scan through the magnetosheath

## X-ray Observation

- The observation was relatively free from soft-proton contamination

## Extract Light Curves

- OVII and Hard Band (2.5-12.0 keV)
- Scatter plot of OVII count rate versus hard count rate to identify soft proton contamination
- Correlation indicates contamination => exclude outliers
- Add MOS1, MOS2 and PN count rates, uncertainties added in quadrature
- Include only data where all three instruments are accepted

## Extract the Solar Wind Fluxes

- Solar wind proton speed
- Solar wind OVII flux
- Solar wind proton flux

- OVII Flux – 103 cm2 s-1

- H+ Flux – 103 cm2 s-1

- H+ Speed km s-1

- Observation

## Data and Model

- Fit constant plus scaled magnetosheath model
- Insufficient heliospheric model variation to get a significant fit
- Best fit has a terrible 2 value, ~2.6
- Dominated by scatter, undersampling of OVII variation?

- Magnetosheath Model

- Heliosphere
- Model

- OVII Flux

## Examine Correlation

- The correlation coefficient is 0.43 for 77 samples, for a probablility >99%
- While the 2 value is bad (~190 for 75 dof), the 2 minimum is deep
- If the model is shifted in time, the 2 minimum at zero shift is relatively narrow and deep
- These are qualitative arguments but support a significant correlation between the model and the data

## Spectral Fit

- Fit for OVII and OVIII – the strongest SWCX lines in the XMM band
- Use XMM-ESAS to model the particle background
- Use RASS spectrum to constrain the fit
- Add a power law for any soft-proton contamination
- OVIII – 0.39(0.17) LU total
- OVII – 4.3(0.3) LU total
- 		    1.6 LU mag.
- OVII measurements agree well with other local values (Smith et al., Kuntz & Snowden)

## 2 Contours for OVII and OVIII

- The spectral fit is reasonably good so the contours are significant
- OVIII detection marginal
- OVII significant

## Conclusions

- Strong correlation found between SWCX magnetosheath emission model
- 		=> First clear verification of SWCX model 		using X-ray data
- 		Model agrees to 36% on first cut
- Observing SWCX in X-rays can lead to remote sensing of the magnetosheath.
- Results will form the basis for modeling the contribution of magnetosheath SWCX emission to astrophysical observations
- Subtraction at this point might be unfeasible but marking observations at risk will be easy.
# Presentation: 463186

## Aircraft Maintenance and Inspections

## Maintenance Quality Assurance 

- Part 91: Owner/operator responsible for aircraft airworthiness
- Required maintenance, inspections
- Not as extensive as requirements for other revenue operations
- Part 135 requires FAA-approved procedures for ensuring each aircraft is airworthy

## Maintenance Quality Assurance

- 8 accident airplanes not airworthy
- Marine City: No compliance with 5 ADs
- West Point: Incomplete records, unapproved door removal, altered FMS
- Others: Overdue inspections, inoperative components
- In some cases, discrepancies related to cause of accident

## Engine Overhauls

- Parachute jump operations conducive to engine wear
- High ratio of cycles to flight hours
- Sustained climb power, then reduction
- May require more frequent overhauls
- Engine manufacturers establish recommended TBO
- TBO not mandatory for Part 91

## Engine Overhauls

- Four accident airplanes’ engines exceeded TBO, two lost power
- Sullivan: right engine had nearly doublethe recommended hours
- East Moriches: engine not overhauled in previous 12 years
- Internal components fractured
- Possibly could have been detected and corrected by overhaul within TBO

## Overview: Safety Issues

- Aircraft Maintenance
- Pilot training and proficiency
- FAA Oversight and Direct Surveillance
- Most of the accidents easily preventable
# Presentation: 506409

## SNAP Computing

- http://snap.lbl.gov

- SNAP is supported by the US Department of Energy
- Office of Science, Division of High Energy Physics

- The Dumbell Nebula, taken with the LBNL CCD Image from NOAO/AURA/NSF
- Copyright WIYN Consortium, Inc., all rights reserved

- Bill Carithers for the SNAP Collaboration

- Simulation

- SNAP has developed a comprehensive,
- end-to end simulation to optimize the
- instrument design and mission concept.

- The simulation generates observational
- data which can compare different missions.
- In the example below, supernova light curves
- are compared for SNAP and a large telescope
- on the ground at redshift z=1.

**LSST-class telescope**
**equipped with NIR**

**SNAP**

- Restframe

- B band

- R band

- The ultimate output of the simulation
- gives the constraints on cosmological parameters

**Constraints on the equation of state and derivative**
**for various models, including priors from CMB**

- Data Processing

- SNAP will generate about 150 GBytes of image
- Data per day. The total raw data set will exceed
- 200 TeraBytes.

- The data are processed on a large cluster
- Of processors such as the Parallel Distributed
- Systems Facility (PDSF) at LBNL

- The processing steps include:
-  Image cleaning
-  Identification of astronomical objects in the field
-  Cataloguing
-  Supernova trigger

- All images and metadata are archived on mass
- storage such as the High Performance
- Storage System (HPSS) at the National Energy
- Research Scientific Computing (NERSC)
- Center located at LBNL

- All data will be made available to the
- Astronomical community

**HPSS at NERSC**
** ****8.8 PetaByte capacity**
** ****35 TeraByte disk cache**

- Data Gold Mine
-  Image data co-added to 30th Mag
-    in 9 filters
-  Time-domain to 27th mag in
-    in 9 filters