Space shuttle abort separation pressure investigation. Volume 2, Part B: Orbiter data at Mach 5

For abstract, see

Space shuttle abort separation pressure investigation. Volume 6: Orbiter data at Mach 2

For abstract, see

Investigation of the McDonnell-Douglas orbiter and booster shuttle models in proximity at Mach numbers 2.0 to 6.0. Volume 7: Proximity data at Mach 4 and 6, interference free and launch vehicle data

Aerodynamic data obtained from a space shuttle abort stage separation wind tunnel test are presented. The .00556 scale models of the orbiter and booster configuration were tested in close proximity using dual balances during the time period of April 21 to April 27 1971. Data were obtained for both booster and orbiter over an angle of attack range from -10 to 10 deg for zero degree sideslip angle. The models were tested at several relative incidence angles and separation distances and power conditions. Plug nozzles utilizing air were used to simulate booster and orbiter plumes at various altitudes along a nominal ascent trajectory. Powered conditions were 100, 50, 25 and 0 percent of full power for the orbiter and 100, 50 and 0 percent of full power for the booster. Pitch control effectiveness data were obtained for both booster and orbiter with power on and off. In addition, launch vehicle data with and without booster power were obtained utilizing a single balance in the booster model. Data were also obtained with the booster canard off in close proximity and for the launch configuration

Space shuttle abort separation pressure investigation. Volume 1, Part B: Booster data at Mach 5

For abstract, see

Space shuttle abort separation pressure investigation. Volume 3: Booster data at Mach 3

For abstract, see

Space shuttle abort separation pressure investigation. Volume 1, Part A: Booster data at Mach 5

Pressure data obtained from a joint Langley Research Center (LaRC)/Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Space Shuttle about stage separation wind tunnel test are presented. The .00556 scale models of the McDonnell-Douglas orbiter and booster configurations were tested in proximity in Tunnel A of the Von Karman Facility (VKF), Arnold Engineering Development Center (AEDC). Mach numbers were 5.0, 3.0, and 2.0 and nominal Reynolds numbers were 1.09, 1.60, and 1.74 million per foot, respectively. Pressure data were obtained for the booster upper surface and orbiter lower surface at angles of attack of -10 deg, -5, 0, 5, and 10 deg for zero degrees sideslip. The models were tested at incidence angles of 0 and 5 deg for several separation distances and power conditions. Plug nozzles utilizing air were used to simulate booster and orbiter plumes at various altitudes along a nominal ascent trajectory. Powered conditions were 100, 50, and 0 percent of full power for the orbiter and 100, 50 and 0 percent of full power for the booster. Data were also obtained with the booster canard off in close proximity

The Case for Dynamic Models of Learners' Ontologies in Physics

In a series of well-known papers, Chi and Slotta (Chi, 1992; Chi & Slotta, 1993; Chi, Slotta & de Leeuw, 1994; Slotta, Chi & Joram, 1995; Chi, 2005; Slotta & Chi, 2006) have contended that a reason for students' difficulties in learning physics is that they think about concepts as things rather than as processes, and that there is a significant barrier between these two ontological categories. We contest this view, arguing that expert and novice reasoning often and productively traverses ontological categories. We cite examples from everyday, classroom, and professional contexts to illustrate this. We agree with Chi and Slotta that instruction should attend to learners' ontologies; but we find these ontologies are better understood as dynamic and context-dependent, rather than as static constraints. To promote one ontological description in physics instruction, as suggested by Slotta and Chi, could undermine novices' access to productive cognitive resources they bring to their studies and inhibit their transition to the dynamic ontological flexibility required of experts.Comment: The Journal of the Learning Sciences (In Press

Genetic Specificity of Hippocampal Subfield Volumes, Relative to Hippocampal Formation, Identified in 2148 Young Adult Twins and Siblings

The hippocampus is a complex brain structure with key roles in cognitive and emotional processing and with subregion abnormalities associated with a range of disorders and psychopathologies. Here we combine data from two large independent young adult twin/sibling cohorts to obtain the most accurate estimates to date of genetic covariation between hippocampal subfield volumes and the hippocampus as a single volume. The combined sample included 2148 individuals, comprising 1073 individuals from 627 families (mean age = 22.3 years) from the Queensland Twin IMaging (QTIM) Study, and 1075 individuals from 454 families (mean age = 28.8 years) from the Human Connectome Project (HCP). Hippocampal subfields were segmented using FreeSurfer version 6.0 (CA4 and dentate gyrus were phenotypically and genetically indistinguishable and were summed to a single volume). Multivariate twin modeling was conducted in OpenMx to decompose variance into genetic and environmental sources. Bivariate analyses of hippocampal formation and each subfield volume showed that 10%–72% of subfield genetic variance was independent of the hippocampal formation, with greatest specificity found for the smaller volumes; for example, CA2/3 with 42% of genetic variance being independent of the hippocampus; fissure (63%); fimbria (72%); hippocampus-amygdala transition area (41%); parasubiculum (62%). In terms of genetic influence, whole hippocampal volume is a good proxy for the largest hippocampal subfields, but a poor substitute for the smaller subfields. Additive genetic sources accounted for 49%–77% of total variance for each of the subfields in the combined sample multivariate analysis. In addition, the multivariate analyses were sufficiently powered to identify common environmental influences (replicated in QTIM and HCP for the molecular layer and CA4/dentate gyrus, and accounting for 7%–16% of total variance for 8 of 10 subfields in the combined sample). This provides the clearest indication yet from a twin study that factors such as home environment may influence hippocampal volumes (albeit, with caveats)