Student Spaceflight Experiments Program (SSEP) Flight Experiment Proposal Guide

for SSEP Mission 14 to the International Space Station (ISS)

Revised: September 7, 2019

This Guide: Is amazing

• Provides an understanding of how to complete a SSEP flight experiment proposal for
Mission 14 to the ISS.
• Includes a description of the required sections for a proposal, including the objectives and
content to be addressed in each section.
• Includes templates for a number of sections.
• Includes a Proposal Style Guide to which all proposals must conform.
• Makes multiple references to, and should therefore be used in conjunction with, two key
SSEP resources:
• SSEP Mission 14 to ISS: Mini-Laboratory Operation webpage
(http://ssep.ncesse.org/?p=24227)
• Required Specificity for Description of Experiment Samples document found in
the Document Library (http://ssep.ncesse.org/?p=1705)

Use the checklist below to make sure your proposal is complete. A proposal has 7 sections —

 Section I. Proposal Cover Page

Note: this section has a 1-page limit and must include a Proposal Summary not to exceed
250 words.

 Section II. Student Team Members and Professional Advisors

Note: use as many pages as needed

 Section III. Experiment Materials and Handling Requirements

Note: use as many pages as needed

 Section IV. The Question to be Addressed by the Experiment

Note: this section has a 2-page limit

 Section V. Experiment Design

Note: this section has a 3-page limit

 Section VI. List of Reference Publications

Note: use as many pages as needed

 Section VII. REQUIRED Letter of Certification by the Teacher Facilitator

 Note: this letter must be signed by the Teacher Facilitator

Proposal Style Guide:

It is typical that a proposal guide for professional researchers includes information on the
required style and layout of a proposal. A standard style ensures uniformity across all submitted
proposals, which is not only helpful to reviewers, but also ensures fairness. For example, one
proposal should not be allowed to place more content on a page by decreasing font size or
margins.

All proposals submitted to SSEP must conform to the following style requirements:
• Font: 12 pt Times New Roman
• Line spacing: single spaced, 12 pt
• Standard 8.5” x 11” pages; single-sided
• 1-inch margins, all around
• All pages numbered
Note that this Proposal Guide conforms to these style requirements.

A proposal should not be submitted with any typos or grammatical errors, which means that
careful proofreading is essential. The Step 2 Review Board will consider any typos and
grammatical errors when grading for “Communication”.

Style Guide for Citations and List of Reference Publications:

The main body of a proposal is found in proposal Sections IV and V. In these sections, the
presentation of current scientific knowledge, and other background content, should be associated
with citations to primary reference publications (Wikipedia is not deemed a primary reference
publication). Citations should be appropriately embedded in the proposal text, and a List of the
Reference Publications cited in the text should be found near the end of the proposal, which is
proposal Section VI.

Note: there are multiple citation styles (APA, AMA, etc.). Students are free to use whichever
citation style their school or community group has adopted.

Organization and Layout

A well laid-out and organized submission allows reviewers to review and assess experiment
proposals without distraction. This Guide provides a template for submitting your SSEP
proposal. However, student teams should not include the previous checklist and style guides in
the proposal to be submitted. Proposal submissions should begin with Section I. Proposal Cover
Page.

Students are also strongly encouraged to exclude all Proposal Guide instructions, guidance and
notes (e.g., descriptions of what to include in each section, Special Notes, etc.) from the proposal
to be submitted. However, it is acceptable and encouraged to include Proposal Guide Section
Headings (e.g., Question to be Addressed by the Experiment, and Experiment Design) and/or
Sub-Headings (e.g., Experimental Rationale, Experimental Procedures) in the proposal to be
submitted.

2
Section I. Proposal Cover Page

Proposal Title: What is the effect of microgravity on the amalgamation of gallium and
aluminum fibers?

(Note: a clear title is important. If your experiment is selected for flight, or chosen as a finalist,
the title will be used by many different individuals and organizations as the means to identify
your experiment, including; the flight operations team, media outlets, the ISS crew, etc.
Therefore, the title should be clear, and directly reflect the experiment proposed. The title should
be one expected of a real science investigation, and not make use of fun or lighthearted
expressions.)

Grade Level of Student Team: Fourth Grade

Submitting School: Open Window School

Submitting Teacher Facilitator

Name: Randy Hollinger
Position: 4th Grade science teacher
Address: 6128 168th Place SE
Daytime phone: 425 747 2911
Cell phone: 850 830 7950
E-mail: rhollinger@ows.org

Submitting Teacher Facilitator:

(The teacher who is serving as the facilitator for the student team submitting this proposal and
who will serve as the formal contact for this proposal.)

(Note: the cell phone number is required below because Step 2 Reviewers have in the past
needed to reach a Teacher Facilitator after school hours to address a question that came up
during the review - the review of finalist proposals often continues well into the evening.)

3
Proposal Summary:

This investigation will examine the effect of microgravity of the amalgamation of

aluminum fibers and gallium and contribute to the further use of these metallic elements as a
resource for structural failures of metal alloys, and the production of hydrogen for possible
hydrogen fuel cells. The amalgamation of aluminum fibers and gallium is when gallium corrodes
th aluminum matrix thus making a brittle metal. Our objective is to see how microgravity effects
the amalgamation of the gallium into the aluminum matrix. This is a very important experiment
for two major reasons:
1. It studies how microgravity effects how aluminum is weakened by the
amalgamation by a liquid metal. The weakening of aluminum by the process of
amalgamation could inform astronauts and engineers about safety issues of alloy
strength and failures.
2. The particular alloy produces small amounts of hydrogen gas which can be
harnessed for hydrogen fuel cells. This means certain metal alloys can be used for
a fuel source in space.

The investigation will show that gallium and aluminum alloys may show a response to
microgravity because it’s a physical reaction not a chemical reaction. The results will compare
the one that went in microgravity to the one on Earth to see the difference. This will be done by
putting the samples into water to measure the amount of hydrogen created and perform a strength
test on the two alloys made in different conditions.

(250-word limit; an overview of the experiment, providing a good yet basic understanding of
what is being proposed and why. The summary should NOT include details of the Experiment
Design, e.g., a list of the experiment samples, the timing of crew interactions. The summary
should be composed using third person narrative, e.g., ‘the investigation will’, and should avoid
using the use of first person pronouns, e.g., I and we.)

(Note: If selected as the flight experiment for your community, the Proposal Summary is
submitted to NASA as part of the formal Mission Investigation Summary Form, which is used as
a media resource for the Mission.)

Section II. Student Team Members and Professional Advisors

Page Limit: use as many pages as necessary

4
What’s in this section? This section needs to include, a list of all students who are members of
the Team submitting this proposal. Under each Team Tier listed below (Co-Principal
Investigators, Co-Investigators, Collaborators) students are to be listed alphabetically. The Team
Tiers, each associated with different levels of student participation in the team, are defined in the
Flight Experiment Proposal Guide: Background for Student Proposers found in the Document
Library. Section II may also include a list of professional Advisors (e.g., professional
researchers, professors, product specialists, etc.) that supported the team during the proposal
process.

Co-Principal Investigators (listed in alphabetical order)

Name: Alice Botvinik

Grade level: 4th grade

Name: Avni Murarka

Grade level: 4th grade

Name: Tia Rantawi

Grade Level: 4th grade

Professional Advisors (not required)

Name: Mrs. Jocelyn Scheintaub

Organization: Satellite Development Manager - LeoStella
Contribution to Team: Helped with information or an exo-thermic reaction

Name: Dr. Stephen Burgin

Organization: Chemistry dept - University of Arkansas
Contribution to Team: Email correspondence to describe the gallium aluminum reaction

5
Section III. Experiment Materials and Handling Requirements

1. Fluids Mixing Enclosure (FME) Mini-laboratory Proposed to be Used (check one):

Type 3 FME Mini-lab (3 experiment volumes: two clamps used)

2. List of Proposed Experiment Samples (Fluids and Solids to be Used)

IMPORTANT NOTES:
i) Specificity of Samples: In the samples list, you must include the exact amount of each
sample you plan to use. For example, you can list the volume (e.g., 0.1 ml of tap water or 0.2
ml of Bacillus subtilis spores), the mass (e.g., 0.1 g yeast), the dimensions (e.g., 0.5 cm x 0.5
cm piece of cotton), or the number to be used (e.g., 5 radish seeds). If your experiment is
selected for flight, the experiment samples must be described with even more specificity, as
required by NASA Flight Safety Review. For the purposes of this proposal, you can list the
samples in the more basic form similar to the examples above. However, since all samples
must be listed in a more detailed manner before the selection of the experiment for flight can
be confirmed, it is highly recommended that you read the document Required Specificity for
Description of Experiment Samples (available in the Document Library on the SSEP
website) for further details on how to list your samples in the format required for flight safety
review, and list your samples at the required specificity in your proposal.

ii) Restrictions on Samples: As detailed on the Mission 14 to ISS: Mini-Laboratory

Operation webpage, the following are restrictions on samples that can be used:
• Prohibited Samples: the following samples (fluids and solids) cannot be used: radioactive
fluids or solids, perfumes, hydrofluoric acid, magnets, cadmium, beryllium, or acetone;
• Technology: inclusion of technology in the FME is not allowed. This includes batteries,
lighting, and any device that is associated with electrical circuits and/or mechanical
systems.
NOTE: Proposals for flight experiments using Prohibited Samples or Technology will not be
accepted for review.

In addition, since NanoRacks and NASA reserve the right to refuse other samples based on
their ability to pass a Flight Safety Review, NCESSE had advised student teams that they
should carefully consider, well in advance of writing a flight experiment proposal, if they
were proposing to use any Hazardous or Problematic Samples (see below). If so, they were to
contact NCESSE immediately so that NanoRacks could assess if there were any issues with
mini-lab operation, or any potential hazard to crew, ferry vehicles, and ISS. This approach
recognized that all proposed samples are subject to final review and approval by NanoRacks
and NASA Toxicology.
• Hazardous Samples: fluids and/or solids that are: i) deemed hazardous enough that there is
concern that the student team is even handling the substances; or ii) that when mixed can
result in excess heat, light, and/or pressure, which could lead to loss of containment or can
adversely impact other FME mini-labs that share the payload box on ISS; or iii) are
biologicals with a BioSafety Level (BSL) of 2 or higher. In order to propose a BSL 2

6
 biological, the student team is required to demonstrate access to a BSL 2 certified
laboratory and technicians for receipt and handling of the sample(s), and may be required
to follow additional safety precautions, including, but not limited to, taking on
responsibility to correctly heat seal the double polyethylene containment bags (provided by
NanoRacks) around the mini-lab before shipping to NanoRacks in Houston, given
NanoRacks may deem handling of the mini-lab containing a BSL 2 biological too
dangerous. There should be no expectation to fly a biological of BSL 3 or higher.
• Problematic Samples: samples that might adversely interact with the mini-lab’s silicone
tube and/or end caps, and which are listed in the NanoRacks List of Problematic Samples
document found in the Document Library. Additional lengthy tests are likely necessary in
order to propose a problematic sample, therefore they must be identified and assessed with
NCESSE well in advance of proposal submission (many weeks) in order for consideration.

If Hazardous or Problematic Samples are not assessed by NCESSE in advance of proposal

submission, the inclusion of those samples will likely lead to rejection of the proposal and the
Team will be required to identify an alterative sample or an alternate/back-up proposal will
need to be submitted in its place by the community.

LIST YOUR PROPOSED EXPERIMENT SAMPLES ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES

FOR THE TYPE OF FME MINI-LAB YOU ARE PROPOSING TO USE

7
8
 If you are using a Type 3 FME Mini-lab

Volume 1
List each fluid/solid to be used and the amount of each sample:

Aluminum- 0.5 grams

Volume 2
List each fluid/solid to be used and the amount of each sample:

Gallium- 0.5 grams

Water- 2mL

Volume 3
List each fluid/solid to be used and the amount of each sample:

Borax- 4mL

IMPORTANT: Are any of the proposed samples human in origin? (check one):
 Yes
✓ No

9
If “Yes”, see the Mission 14 to ISS: Mini-Laboratory Operation webpage for details on the
tests that your team must perform on the human samples before the experiment can be
selected for flight, and explain below the results or the current status of these tests.

10
3. Special Handling Requirements During Transportation
FME Mini-labs will be transported through multiple legs en route to the ISS and then back to
the student team. The different transportation legs are listed in Table 1 below. For many of the
transportation legs, student teams can i) choose to refrigerate the FME, or ii) choose not to
refrigerate, which means the FME will be subjected to the ambient temperature for that leg
(e.g., the temperature in the back of a FedEx truck). See the Mission 14 to ISS: Mini-
Laboratory Operation webpage for more specifics on the thermal controls during
transportation.

In Table 1, for each of the other legs, designate with an “X” the thermal control you are
requesting for your experiment. Note in Table 1 that the entries identified as “X
(required)” are not optional.

Table 1: Requesting Thermal Control for Your Experiment

Ambient
Refrigeration Conditions
PRE- Shipping from your Community to NanoRacks in Houston X
FLIGHT At NanoRacks until Handover to NASA X
Handover to NASA Until Arrival at ISS X
FLIGHT
Onboard ISS X (required)
POST- From ISS until Arrival at NanoRacks X (required)
FLIGHT At NanoRacks through Return Shipping to Community X

4. Proposed Timeline of Crew Interactions – Your Proposed Crew Interaction Days and
Crew Interactions Aboard ISS
You must provide a list of your proposed Crew Interaction Days and the proposed Crew
Interactions on each day. This list is defined as your Timeline of Crew Interactions, and is
submitted by your team by completing Table 5 below. However, before completing Table 5,
read the following guidance.

You can only request Crew Interactions on the five allowed Crew Interaction Days provided
by NanoRacks and NASA. You can only request allowed Crew Interactions.

Allowed Crew Interaction Days: For the days listed below, A=0 is the Day of Arrival, when
the SSEP experiments payload is brought from the ferry vehicle through the hatch on ISS, and
U=0 is the Day of Undock, when the ferry vehicle with the SSEP experiments payload
undocks from ISS for return to Earth.

Table 2: Allowed Crew Interaction Days

1 on arrival at ISS (day payload is transferred from ferry vehicle to ISS) A=0
2 during first week (2 days after transfer from ferry vehicle to ISS) A+2
3 2 weeks prior to undock (14 days before undock) U-14
4 in week prior to undock (5 days before undock) U-5
5 in week prior to undock (2 days before undock) U-2

11
Allowed Crew Interactions: only the interactions listed in Table 3 below are allowed, unless a
team had requested and received approval for some other interaction from NCESSE before
submitting a proposal.

Table 3: Allowed Crew Interactions

Allowed Crew Allowed Modifiers
Interactions
“Unclamp” (Open Clamp) none
“Clamp” (means Re-clamp none
or Close Clamp)
“Shake” type of shaking: “gently”, “vigorously”
duration required in units of 5 seconds: e.g., “5 sec”,
“15 sec”, “20 sec”, “35 sec”, “60 sec”, “95 sec”
“Wait” a team can request that the astronaut wait a specified
number of seconds between two other requested
interactions; wait duration (required to be in units of 5
seconds): “xx sec”

IMPORTANT NOTES
i) Crew Interaction Days Are Subject to Change: The five allowed Crew Interaction Days are
subject to change based on the overall work schedule of the astronauts aboard the station. In
addition, astronauts are not typically scheduled for activities on weekends, which means that
crew interaction days falling on a weekend are also subject to change at NASA’s discretion.
After the experiments have been selected for flight, the SSEP team will work with the student
team, NanoRacks, and NASA to place the requested Crew Interaction Days into the
astronauts’ final work schedule. Therefore, the proposers should not assume that the timeline
they are requesting below is final; instead, it is subject to adjustments and final approval by
NanoRacks and NASA.

ii) The maximum amount of time you can request on a single Crew Interaction Day is 120
seconds.

iii) Clamp Designations for the Type 3 FME Mini-lab (refer to the figure on previous page):
remember that Clamp A (located between Volumes 1 and 2) will be the first clamp to be
unclamped by the astronaut. Clamp B (located between Volumes 2 and 3), can either be
unclamped immediately after Clamp A, or can be un-clamped on some later Crew Interaction
Day. Make sure that in the description of your proposed Timeline of Crew Interactions below,
you correctly identify “Clamp A” and “Clamp B”, e.g., “Day U-5: Unclamp Clamp A, shake
gently for 5 seconds”.

iv) There can be NO request for the astronaut to: observe what is happening in the FME; take
notes; photograph or videotape the FME. Since the student team will seal the samples inside
the FME mini-lab and it will not be opened again until the student team receives it after the
flight, there can be no handling requests that require the astronaut to remove the containment
bags and physically open the FME. Allowable Crew Interaction Days, Interactions and

12
Modifiers are defined in detail on the SSEP Mission 14 to ISS: Mini-lab Operations
webpage.

Table 4 below provides an example of a proposed Timeline of Crew Interactions. If you are
using a Type 3 FME Mini-lab, which requires two instances where clamps are to be
unclamped and the FME is to be shaken to mix the contents of the experiment volumes, you
could state:

Complete Table 5 below:

Table 5: Your Proposed Timeline of Crew Interactions

Allowed Crew
Requested Interaction
Interaction Day

1. Unclamp the stopper

between volume 1 and 2.
Shake vigorously for 30
seconds.
A=0
2. Massage for 30 seconds.
Unclamp the final clamp and
massage for 30 seconds to allow
gallium to mix with aluminum
fibers.
1.
A+2

U-14 Do nothing

U-5 Do nothing

U-2 Do nothing

13
Section IV. The Question to be Addressed by the Experiment

Page Limit: 2 pages, including any figures and photos; the expectation is that no proposal
should be submitted with just a few sentences for this section.

What’s in this section?

This section needs to include, but is not limited to:

• detailed description of the basic question to be addressed by the experiment; this must include
a justification for why it makes sense for this experiment to be conducted in microgravity.

We will look at the effects of microgravity on gallium aluminum alloy. At first, we were
going to experiment on gallium crystals but we saw that this has been done before and we also
noticed that Gallium made aluminum very weak when it interacted. This led us the questions
about how this process happened and how it might be different in microgravity. It turns out the
weakening is caused by a physical reaction called amalgamation. This means that gravity could
have a big effect on it. It got even more interesting when we learned that gallium-aluminum
alloys are being studied to make hydrogen for hydrogen fuel cells which maybe could power
space craft one day. We believe that it is really important as an experiment because it could help
with astronaut safety and with making machines work with recycled parts.

• discussion of current scientific understanding that is relevant to the question: explain what is
already known, and how this knowledge naturally leads to the question to be addressed by the
experiment.

The atomic number of Gallium is 31 and was discovered by Paul-Émile Lecoq de

Boisbaudran in 1875. The melting point is 85.56 F and gallium will melt in your hand
even in Alaska. Gallium can mix with another element to create LED or semi-conductors.
Gallium can be found in bauxite and other crystals.
The atomic number of Aluminum is 13 and was discovered by Hans-Christian in 18

What we already know about gallium and aluminum is that on Earth, the gallium invades
the metal matrix of aluminum when it comes in contact with it. The gallium then weakens the
aluminum bonds and makes the aluminum brittle. As far as we know, this has not been attempted
in a microgravity environment. It is a physical reaction not a chemical reaction so we might
expect the reaction to be much different in microgravity. We have done many ground tests using
a model of an FME tube and our experiments show that this it will work with the tubes that we
are required to use for the ISS.
One surprise to us was that we learned that gallium aluminum alloy would start to fizz
when we put it in water. We did not expect this, so we had to do more research. What we found
out was that gallium aluminum alloy makes hydrogen bubbles in water and this can be used to
make hydrogen gas that can be used in fuel cells to run machines. Researches at Purdue
University are using this exact material to try ideas on how people can use alloys as a source of
fuel. We believe that his make our experiment even more interesting as fuel can be expensive
and difficult to use efficiently in space.

14
• description of the insight that will be gained from the experiment: how an answer to the
question posed can either add to, or provide added confirmation of, the current understanding.
We think that this experiment can be very helpful to scientists in space travel. Liquid
metal like gallium (and the more poisonous mercury) seem to weaken other metals by invading
the metal matrix. Liquid metals would be used often in space for welding, thermometers, mirrors
and other uses. We think scientists would want to know how the corrosive effects might be
different in a micro-gravity environment. For example, mercury is used in thermometers and it is
known to do the same corrosion as gallium does on aluminum. Aluminum is a common metal on
spacecraft as it doesn’t rust and can be light and strong. If a thermometer were to break and the
liquid metal were to come in contact with aluminum, our experiment could help scientists
understand what might happen and how that reaction might be different in micro-gravity.
We also think that scientists would be interested in knowing how the new alloys might
produce hydrogen gas when added to water. Maybe these alloys could be used to create fuel
cells. The gallium and the aluminum are easily recycled in the process can be used many times
over and even recycled machine parts could be used for fuel. Imagine if you could run an engine
by using recycled aluminum parts and mixing it with gallium metal. The gallium is actually not
used up in this process so as long as you have aluminum available, you could make hydrogen for
small machines on a space craft using recycled materials.
We think we can add new discoveries on how liquid metals mix with other metals we do
not know of any experiments that have been done on this topic before so we are excited that our
results might be important to scientists. Maybe other scientists can use our results to do the
experiment again and add to what we learned.

Pictures here:

An investigator checks for bubbles.

15
Note: you should think of the bulleted list above as a checklist of topics that need to be
addressed in your write-up of Section IV. They are presented in a logical order. However, you
are not required to write them up separately, and the order in which you address them is up to
you. In this section you are telling the “story” of your experiment, and you can weave the topics
above into that story in a way that is logical for your experiment, so that the story flows.

16
Section V. Experiment Design

Page Limit: 3 pages, including any figures and photos; the expectation is that the proposing
team will make good use of the page limit for this section. NCESSE cannot imagine how all
the points below can be addressed in less than 1.5–2 pages.

What’s in this section?

A detailed description of the experiment: The description needs to include, but is not limited to:

1. the experimental rationale: This experiment is important for two main reasons: The
expirement will realese hydrogen creating gas and the amalgamation will create a
metal.

2. the experimental materials: we will use gallium chunks, aluminum fibers, borax and room-
temprature water. For the results a force meter, microscope, scale and clock. We chose these
materials because we can see if the aluminum will weaken while combining with gallium.
1. Gallium metal
2. Aluminum fibers
3. Force meter
4. Microscope
5. Scale
6. Camera
7. Beakers
8. Water
9. Borax
10. Stopwatch

3. the experimental procedure: an understanding of how the experiment is initiated, how it is

conducted on orbit inside the FME mini-lab, taking into account the mini-lab’s operation; and
how it is concluded. This discussion must also include the results of the tests the team has
conducted to make sure their experimental procedure is valid. For example, if the team is
planning to use dormant biological samples (e.g., bacteria spores) that will be activated in
orbit with an activating solution (e.g., by mixing the dormant bacteria with a nutrient broth),
the team must demonstrate that the proposed activating solution really works as planned. This
can be done by simply placing the spores in the nutrient broth solution and, after confirming
that the spores activate as expected, briefly describing the results of this test in the proposal.

The experiment we initiated by astronauts on the first crew interaction day. On the first day
the astronaut will unclamp the stopper between volume one and two. Then they will shake
vigorously for thirty seconds. After this they will massage the tube for thirty seconds. Then
they will unclamp the final clamp and massage for thirty seconds to allow gallium to mix with
aluminum fibers. During the rest of the time in orbit, the astronauts will not be required to
perform any other steps. The experiment is concluded after the first day and it will be
evaluated once sent back to earth. The experiment has been tested three times and we are
confident that our experiment steps are fully reliable.

17
 1. Measure out 0.5 grams of gallium.
2. Melt the gallium using hot water.
3. Measure 0.5 grams of aluminum fibers
4. Measure 2mL of water and 4mL of borax
5. Place them in a tube
6. Send to space
7. Come back
8. Take detailed photos
9. Place on a scale
10. Look under a microscope
11. Measure the strength of the aluminum
12. Drop the aluminized gallium into a beaker filled with water

4. ground elements: a description of elements of the experiment that are conducted on the
ground, which may be: i) conducted before the FME mini-lab is sent to the ISS, ii) conducted
simultaneously with the experiment aboard the ISS (the ‘ground truth’ or ‘control’
experiment(s), which are critically required for a microgravity experiment), or iii) conducted
after the FME is returned to the student team; and the purpose of these ground elements.
We have conducted the ground experiment three times. Before the FME mini-lab is sent to the ISS,
we will melt exactly five grams

Allowed Crew
Requested Interaction
Interaction Day

3. Unclamp the stopper

between volume 1 and 2.
Shake vigorously for 30
seconds.
A=0
4. Massage for 30 seconds.
Unclamp the final clamp and
massage for 30 seconds to allow
gallium to mix with aluminum
fibers.
Do nothing
A+2

U-14 Do nothing

U-5 Do nothing

U-2 Do nothing

18
5. experimental analysis: a description of the analysis to be performed on the samples on return
to Earth; and how that analysis is designed to assess whether the experiment provided insight
into the question it was designed to address. Note: simply stating that “we will compare flight
and ground experiments on return to Earth” is not acceptable. The details of how the analysis
is to be carried out must be provided. If a team is planning on using any special equipment
during analysis (e.g., an electron microscope), it is important to explain how the team will
have access to the equipment.

Our experiment analysis plan:

1. Put both samples side by side and take many photographs. This will show different
details and can help record our results.
2. Use a digital gram scale to weight the aluminized gallium. Compare the ground truth
weight with the ISS experiment. We will also sum up the weight of both the aluminum
and gallium and see if weight was lost or gained.
3. Use a newton force meter to check how strong the aluminum is and take a video of it
using a slow-motion iPad camera. According to our research, when gallium
amalgamates with aluminum the gallium invades the matrix of aluminum and
weakens it. We will see if the same is true for experiments that go into space.
4. Take a stereo or compound microscope to closely see the structure of the metal. The
amalgamation in space can leave traces of how in happened which
5. Drop it in a beaker filled with water and using a stopwatch time how long it will
bubble. The metal with bubble because of the hydrogen realesed during the
amalgamation. The water will bubble because of the hydrogen so seeing how long it
will bubble is one way to measure the hydrogen.
6.

Note: you should think of the bulleted list above as a checklist of topics that need be addressed
in your write-up of Section V. They are presented in a logical order. However, you are not
required to write them up separately, and the order in which you address them is up to you. In
this section you are telling the “story” of your experiment, and you can weave the topics above
into that story in a way that is logical for your experiment, so that the story flows.

Section VI. List of Reference Publications

• Gallium v aluminium. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.rigb.org/ri-videos/gallium-v-

aluminium.
• “Gallium.” The World of Physics,
sites.psu.edu/passionmalencia/2013/04/16/gallium/.

• staff, S. X. (2007, May 16). New process generates hydrogen from aluminum alloy to
run engines, fuel cells. Retrieved from https://phys.org/news/2007-05-hydrogen-
aluminum-alloy-fuel-cells.html.
• “New Process Generates Hydrogen from Aluminum Alloy to Run Engines, Fuel Cells.”
Phys.org, phys.org/news/2007-05-hydrogen-aluminum-alloy-fuel-cells.html.

19
 •

Note: there are multiple citation styles (APA, AMA, etc.). The community is free to use
whatever citation style they have adopted for students. However, if using a web reference,
please provide the complete URL in the List of References.

20
Section VII. REQUIRED Letter of Certification by the Teacher Facilitator (template
below)

Note: this letter must be signed by the Teacher Facilitator, scanned, and emailed to NCESSE as
an attached PDF document.

[Date]

I certify that the student team designed the experiment described herein and authored this
proposal, and not a teacher, parent, or other adult. I recognize that the purpose of this letter is to
ensure that there was no adult serving to lead experiment definition and design, or write the
proposal, and thereby provide content and/or professional expertise beyond that expected of a
student-designed and student-proposed experiment.

I also understand that NCESSE recognizes that facilitation of thinking across the student team
through advice and counsel by the team’s Teacher Facilitator, other teachers, and local area and
national researchers, is not only to be encouraged but is absolutely vital if students are to receive
the necessary guidance on the process of scientific inquiry, experimental design, how to do
background research in relevant science disciplines, and on writing the proposal. I also
understand that it is appropriate for the Teacher Facilitator and other teachers to provide editorial
comment to the student team on their proposal drafts before proposal submission.

I also certify that the samples list and the special handling requests listed in this proposal are
accurate and conform to the requirements for SSEP Mission 13 to ISS. I confirm that the team,
after reviewing their procedure and budget for obtaining the samples for the experiment, is
certain that they will be able to obtain the necessary samples for their experiment in time to meet
the deadline for shipping the flight-ready FME to NanoRacks. If using human samples, the team
is aware that these samples must be tested for prohibited viruses before the experiment can be
selected for flight.

Finally, I certify that the student team will have access to the proper facilities and equipment to
prepare the FME mini-laboratory for flight and to analyze the samples after the flight.

[Signature]

[Name]
Teacher Facilitator

21