Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Design verification”

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 253 records · Page 14
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Advanced Space Suit Pressure Garment System Status and Development Priorities 2022

This paper discusses the current focus of NASA’s Advanced Space Suit Pressure Garment Technology Development team’s efforts, the status of that work, and a summary of longer-term technology development priorities and activities. For the past two years, the team has focused on the development and detailed design of the Extra-vehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) to support two parallel missions: A 2023 deadline for delivery of the xEMU International Space Station (ISS)Demonstration configuration, and a planetary walking suit configuration to support landing on the Moon in 2024. The baselined design of the xEMU will be reviewed. The results of Design Verification Testing (DVT) will be presented and its ability to provide confidence in the hardware’s ability to meet flight requirements will be discussed. To the extent possible, an impact assessment of the Exploration Extravehicular Activity Services (xEVAS) Contract will be provided. Finally, a brief review of longer-term pressure garment challenges and technology gaps will be presented to provide an understanding of the advanced pressure garment team’s technology investment priorities and needs for future exploration missions.

xEMU↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

MBSE Applications for the MSR SRC Mars Ascent Vehicle

The objective of the NASA Mars Sample Return (MSR) Campaign is to collect samples from the surface of Mars and return them to Earth for scientific research. The Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) will be integrated into a larger Mars Sample Retrieval Lander (SRL) for transit to and storage on Mars. After all Martian samples have been collected and loaded into the MAV payload assembly, MAV will deliver the samples from the Martian surface to Mars orbit. A separate spacecraft, the Earth Return Orbiter (ERO) will retrieve the samples from Mars orbit and return them to Earth. To address common systems engineering challenges associated with using traditional systems engineering practices on complex projects, the MAV systems engineering team has explored implementation of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) tools and languages. This paper describes the current state of implementation and development of the MAV MBSE model with the Systems Modeling Language (SysML) within the scope of the MAV Systems Requirement Cycle (SRC) systems engineering workflow. The MAV MBSE model has been developed within Magic Draw – a SysML editor commonly used to implement MBSE. The MAV MBSE model has been used to develop mission phase functional flow diagrams for the Concept of Operations, decompose mission to vehicle subsystem functions, develop a functional decomposition, derive functional requirements, trace requirements up to customer-imposed requirements, trace requirements within MAV requirement space, identify requirements trace gaps, define and map the physical design space architecture, allocate requirements to subsystems, develop validation items, define assembly, integration, and test (AI&T) operations, and trace these items across driving goals to develop an integrated digital thread of systems engineering information used to drive design specifications, decision making, and ultimately design verification and validation. Findings and results associated with implementing MBSE in these ways, alongside traditional methods will be discussed.

MBSE↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

MBSE Applications for the MSR SRC Mars Ascent Vehicle

The objective of the NASA Mars Sample Return (MSR) Campaign is to collect samples from the surface of Mars and return them to Earth for scientific research. The Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) will be integrated into a larger Mars Sample Retrieval Lander (SRL) for transit to and storage on Mars. After all Martian samples have been collected and loaded into the MAV payload assembly, MAV will deliver the samples from the Martian surface to Mars orbit. A separate spacecraft, the Earth Return Orbiter (ERO) will retrieve the samples from Mars orbit and return them to Earth. To address common systems engineering challenges associated with using traditional systems engineering practices on complex projects, the MAV systems engineering team has explored implementation of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) tools and languages. This paper describes the current state of implementation and development of the MAV MBSE model with the Systems Modeling Language (SysML) within the scope of the MAV Systems Requirement Cycle (SRC) systems engineering workflow. The MAV MBSE model has been developed within Magic Draw – a SysML editor commonly used to implement MBSE. The MAV MBSE model has been used to develop mission phase functional flow diagrams for the Concept of Operations, decompose mission to vehicle subsystem functions, develop a functional decomposition, derive functional requirements, trace requirements up to customer-imposed requirements, trace requirements within MAV requirement space, identify requirements trace gaps, define and map the physical design space architecture, allocate requirements to subsystems, develop validation items, define assembly, integration, and test (AI&T) operations, and trace these items across driving goals to develop an integrated digital thread of systems engineering information used to drive design specifications, decision making, and ultimately design verification and validation. Findings and results associated with implementing MBSE in these ways, alongside traditional methods will be discussed.

MBSE↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Advanced Space Suit Pressure Garment System Status and Development Priorities 2022

This paper discusses the current focus of NASA’s Advanced Space Suit Pressure Garment Technology Development team’s efforts, the status of that work, and a summary of longer-term technology development priorities and activities. For the past two years, the team has focused on the development and detailed design of the Extra-Vehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) to support two parallel missions: A 2023 deadline for delivery of the xEMU International Space Station (ISS) Demonstration configuration, and a planetary walking suit configuration to support landing on the Moon in 2024. The baselined design of the xEMU will be reviewed. The results of Design Verification Testing (DVT) will be presented and its ability to provide confidence in the hardware’s ability to meet flight requirements will be discussed. To the extent possible, an impact assessment of the Exploration Extra-Vehicular Activity Services (xEVAS) Contract will be provided. Finally, a brief review of longer-term pressure garment challenges and technology gaps will be presented to provide an understanding of the advanced pressure garment team’s technology investment priorities and needs for future exploration missions.

NASA↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploration Helmet Permanent Anti-fog Study

For the current Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) spacesuit, an astronaut applies an anti-fog solution to the interior of the helmet bubble before each EVA. However, the anti-fog solution has been reported to cause eye discomfort during at least seven EMU EVAs when the anti-fog solution contacted the crew member’s eyes. During STS-100, astronaut Chris Hadfield reported the eye irritation temporarily blinded him during his spacewalk. In addition, the wipe on anti-fog solution is a consumable that needs to be accounted for and a supply launched for missions. To solve this, the Exploration EMU (xEMU) pressure bubble investigated using a permanent anti-fog coating during Design Verification and Test (DVT) human in the loop (HITL) events. Chosen for previous use in Constellation Space Suit develop, HTAF-601, a water based permanent anti-fog solution, was tested. However, major issues have arisen with further HITL testing with the coating. Cleaning the helmet has been a challenge to avoid damaging the permanent anti-fog coating. NASA has completed a set of different methods for cleaning the anti-fog to try to document a preferred method. It was found isopropyl alcohol (IPA) cannot be used to clean the interior of the helmet because it will strip and delaminate the permanent anti-fog coating. Even with using a very gentle cleaning method of flushing with distilled or DI water and dabbing at facial oils, the permanent anti-fog starts to delaminate consistently after 50 hours manned pressurized time (MPT). Finally, the HTAF-601 coating is being discontinued by the vendor. Due to these issues, further investigation is being completed evaluating two solvent based anti-fog solutions: Exxene’s HCF-100 and FSI’s Visgard 106-94. Each coating will be evaluated on polycarbonate samples for application consistency, steam cycles (mimicking breath cycles), cleaning durability, haze, and light transmission. This study will determine if either coating is a viable option to pursue as a permanent anti-fog for spacesuit helmet applications.

spacesuit↗
NASA NTRS2023

Technology Infusion in U.S. Spacesuits - A Comparative System Analysis

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has evolved multiple spacesuit systems for performing extravehicular activity (EVA) or space walks. These spacesuit systems include the Apollo Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU), Space Shuttle and International Space Station (ISS) EMU, and Exploration EMU (xEMU). Each spacesuit system is like the other for functionality. However, each spacesuit system is different in configuration based on the technology infused into the system associated with the purpose of the mission. Each spacesuit system is made up of many components and the integrate environment targeted for operations leads to an integrated system that is complex. Since Apollo, NASA has invested in multiple technologies that make up these spacesuit systems in different iterations. The Apollo EMU was designed in the 1960’s with a focus to facilitate the first human to walk on the moon. The Space Shuttle EMU was designed in the 1970’s for reusable microgravity operations that began in the early 1980’s. The Space Shuttle EMU was enhanced to facilitate extended operation on the ISS. Over the last 15 years, NASA has been designing, developing, and testing a new spacesuit system, the xEMU which is considered a design, verification, and test unit. NASA is planning to land the first woman and first person of color on the Moon. NASA recently engaged industry through a new contractual arrangement to provide EVA services needed to return to the Moon and to continue operations on the ISS. Spacesuit systems are complex. Understanding the requirements, operational environment, the necessary technologies, and the integrated spacesuit system are paramount. In addition, understanding the technology infusion process to meet the mission objectives is critical. This paper will review the spacesuit systems for EVA and several component functions within the spacesuits, along with a system comparison of those technologies from Apollo to xEMU.

Extravehicular Activity (EVA)↗
NASA NTRS2024

Considerations in Range of Motion Testing for Characterizing Spacesuit Mobility Capabilities

Mobility is a critical aspect for spacesuits as it directly influences how astronauts can perform tasks safely and efficiently, while wearing the pressurized suit. Spacesuit motion is dissimilar to human movement and consists of unique movement patterns as result of pressurization and the complex mechanical joint configurations. Thus, it is important to quantify the variations in suited movement patterns and the resulting performance of the wearer for the evaluation of the spacesuit itself and hardware interfaces such as payloads and tools. Traditionally, an individual body joint is assessed for the segment-wise range of motion. For example, the knee is measured through an isolated maneuvering of the joint between the max-to-max positions (e.g., flexion/extension), and the outcome represents the mobility capabilities. These measurements are often conducted using optical motion capture system with respect to anatomical planes. However, there are several considerations for range of motion assessments that are unique to the spacesuit. The purpose of this paper is to describe and provide examples of these additional challenges in representing spacesuit mobility capabilities. Specifically, joint mobility and the variations in suit movement patterns were investigated and compared between functional tasks and isolated range of motion measurements. Motion capture data from the next-gen spacesuit design verification testing was evaluated to compare isolated range of motion tasks to functional tasks, such as one-knee kneeling and squatting. The trajectories from the upper and lower body joint centers with respect to the spacesuit hardware were also calculated. Additionally, the joint trajectories for various functional tasks are presented and compared against the isolated range of motion measurements. In general, range of motion differs between isolated and functional tasks, where functional tasks may even induce greater joint angle excursions. Additionally, there is a large variation in joint range of motion across functional tasks. Combined with several relevant factors (spacesuit fit, physical strength, simulation facility, etc.), spacesuit mobility characterization efforts will need to incorporate the specific contexts, such as task demands and movement mechanisms, when evaluating range of motion assessments.

Linh Q Vu↗
NASA NTRS2024

Short Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit Testing Setup: Evaluation Under Realistic Pressure and Thermal Conditions

The purpose of Short Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (SxEMU) thermal vacuum testing was to verify the functionality of the Design Verification Testing (DVT) prototype xEMU (SxEMU for this test) at vacuum pressures and extreme space and lunar surface temperature conditions. The SxEMU Thermal Vacuum Test was the culmination of the DVT xEMU project. This paper’s focus is on the pre-Extravehicular Activity (EVA) test setup, and general performance of the SxEMU Portable Life Support Subsystem (xPLSS), with focus on the performance of the Primary Oxygen Assembly (POA) and Secondary Oxygen Assembly (SOA), including Secondary Oxygen Regulator (SOR) takeover and the POA and SOA low-setpoint change inhibit. The initial pre-EVA test preparation included recharging the batteries and replenishing consumables, including test-system water, oxygen assemblies (with gaseous nitrogen), and the integrated thermal loops, including the Feedwater Supply Assemblies. xPLSS functionality testing included carbon dioxide (CO2) removal via the Rapid Cycle Amine swingbed system, thermal loop temperature control, and monitoring of suit ventilation loop pressure, temperature, and CO2 percentages. Testing evaluated automatic takeover of suit pressure control by the SOR after the primary oxygen supply is depleted. The Primary Oxygen Regulator and SOR low-setpoint change inhibit function prevents the crewmember from inadvertently setting the primary regulator to a low pressure setpoint during an EVA.

xPLSS↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Considerations for Range of Motion Testing During Spacesuit Mobility Characterization

Mobility is a critical aspect for spacesuits as it directly influences how astronauts can perform tasks safely and efficiently, while wearing the pressurized suit. Spacesuit motion is dissimilar to human movement and consists of unique movement patterns as result of pressurization and the complex mechanical joint configurations. Thus, it is important to quantify the variations in suited movement patterns and the resulting performance of the wearer for the evaluation of the spacesuit itself and hardware interfaces such as payloads and tools. Traditionally, an individual body joint is assessed for the segment-wise range of motion. For example, the knee is measured through an isolated maneuvering of the joint between the max-to-max positions (e.g., flexion/extension), and the outcome represents the mobility capabilities. These measurements are often conducted using optical motion capture system with respect to anatomical planes. However, there are several considerations for range of motion assessments that are unique to the spacesuit. The purpose of this paper is to describe and provide examples of these additional challenges in representing spacesuit mobility capabilities. Specifically, joint mobility and the variations in suit movement patterns were investigated and compared between functional tasks and isolated range of motion measurements. Motion capture data from the next-gen spacesuit design verification testing was evaluated to compare isolated range of motion tasks to functional tasks, such as one-knee kneeling and squatting. The trajectories from the upper and lower body joint centers with respect to the spacesuit hardware were also calculated. Additionally, the joint trajectories for various functional tasks are presented and compared against the isolated range of motion measurements. In general, range of motion differs between isolated and functional tasks, where functional tasks may even induce greater joint angle excursions. Additionally, there is a large variation in joint range of motion across functional tasks. Combined with several relevant factors (spacesuit fit, physical strength, simulation facility, etc.), spacesuit mobility characterization efforts will need to incorporate the specific contexts, such as task demands and movement mechanisms, when evaluating range of motion assessments.

Linh Q Vu↗
NASA NTRS2024

Exploration Systems Exterior Lighting Design Guidance

Humans are returning to the Moon — this time, to stay. NASA has selected a location that maximizes line-of-sight communication with Earth, solar visibility, and access to water ice: the Lunar South Pole (LSP). While the Sun is more consistently in the lunar sky at the poles, it never rises more than 7° above the horizon in the target landing regions. This harsh lighting environment--never experienced during the Apollo missions or in human spaceflight--presents an engineering challenge: Support and protect functional vision. The human vision system, which despite having a high-dynamic range, cannot see well into bright light and cannot adapt quickly from bright to dark or vice versa. The design of helmets, windows, and lighting solutions must work in a complementary fashion to achieve a system of lighting and functional vision support that enables crews to see into darkness while their eyes are light-adapted and see in bright light while still dark-adapted that protects their eyes from injury. This report brings together information and identifies gaps related to LSP Natural environment (topology, regolith, temperature, lighting, and so forth), NASA historical experience exploring the Moon, human vision capabilities and needs, exploration operations, simulation capabilities and needs (for design verification, training, mission planning, and so forth) and existing engineering, safety, medical and performance requirements related to support human exploration.

Simulation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Launch Vehicle Design and Requirements Verification Using Statistical Methods

- This presentation applies statistics to launch vehicle design, but the methods may be used for other engineering applications - Vehicle Models: What do we know when? How to separate parameters for making Monte Carlo runs - Known when assembling the vehicle but not during design - Known prior to committing to flight - Unknown at lift off - How do we correctly model the vehicle during the design phases? - Number of Monte Carlo samples - Requirements success - Design parameter values

Monte Carlo↗
NASA NTRS1995

Special features of the CLUSTER antenna and radial booms design, development and verification

CLUSTER is a scientific space mission to in-situ investigate the Earth's plasma environment by means of four identical spin-stabilized spacecraft. Each spacecraft is provided with a set of four rigid booms: two Antenna Booms and two Radial Booms. This paper presents a summary of the boom development and verification phases addressing the key aspects of the Radial Boom design. In particular, it concentrates on the difficulties encountered in fulfilling simultaneously the requirements of minimum torque ratio and maximum allowed shock loads at boom latching for this two degree of freedom boom. The paper also provides an overview of the analysis campaign and testing program performed to achieve sufficient confidence in the boom performance and operation.

Gianfiglio, G.↗
NASA NTRS1982

Design, analysis, and test verification of advanced encapsulation systems

Design sensitivities are established for the development of photovoltaic module criteria and the definition of needed research tasks. The program consists of three phases. In Phase I, analytical models were developed to perform optical, thermal, electrical, and structural analyses on candidate encapsulation systems. From these analyses several candidate systems will be selected for qualification testing during Phase II. Additionally, during Phase II, test specimens of various types will be constructed and tested to determine the validity of the analysis methodology developed in Phase I. In Phse III, a finalized optimum design based on knowledge gained in Phase I and II will be developed. All verification testing was completed during this period. Preliminary results and observations are discussed. Descriptions of the thermal, thermal structural, and structural deflection test setups are included.

Mardesich, N.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Design, Formalization, and Verification of Decision Making for Intelligent Systems

The development of autonomous systems requires a rigorous process that can guarantee a system’s reliability in critical applications. At its core, an autonomous system bases its behavior on a well-defined decision making system. In this paper, we present a methodological basis for the design, formalization and formal verification of Decision Making systems for autonomous agents. The approach is generally applicable to operational objectives that can be functionally decomposed and subsequently represented as Hierarchical Finite State Machines. As a case study, we present the application of this method to implement a Decision Making model in Simulink. Furthermore, we present how we use NASA’s FRET tool to write requirements in structured natural language and generate formal specifications that can be automatically digested by NASA’s CoCoSim tool. Finally, we present how, by leveraging CoCoSim, we perform formal verification against the Simulink model and present analysis results.

Model-based development↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Design, Formalization, and Verification of Decision Making for Intelligent Systems

The development of autonomous systems requires a rigorous process that can guarantee a system’s reliability in critical applications. At its core, an autonomous system bases its behavior on a well-defined decision making system. In this paper, we present a methodological basis for the design, formalization and formal verification of Decision Making systems for autonomous agents. The approach is generally applicable to operational objectives that can be functionally decomposed and subsequently represented as Hierarchical Finite State Machines. As a case study, we present the application of this method to implement a Decision Making model in Simulink. Furthermore, we present how we use NASA’s FRET tool to write requirements in structured natural language and generate formal specifications that can be automatically digested by NASA’s CoCoSim tool. Finally, we present how, by leveraging CoCoSim, we perform formal verification against the Simulink model and present analysis results.

Model-based development↗
NASA NTRS1991

Orbital transfer vehicle engine technology: Baffled injector design, fabrication, and verification

New technologies for space-based, reusable, throttleable, cryogenic orbit transfer propulsion are being evaluated. Supporting tasks for the design of a dual expander cycle engine thrust chamber design are documented. The purpose of the studies was to research the materials used in the thrust chamber design, the supporting fabrication methods necessary to complete the design, and the modification of the injector element for optimum injector/chamber compatibility.

Schneider, J. A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Thermoplastic Composite Lunar Tower Truss Structure: Design Development and Verification Plans

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Space Technology and Mission Directorate (STMD) is advancing thermoplastic composite (TPC) technologies for exploration missions. The Technology Development for Exploration Applications (TDEA) project goals are to develop and mature TPC materials, designs, analyses tools and techniques, and mature manufacturing processes. This includes development of manufacturing and joining approaches relevant to space environments. To these ends TDEA endeavors toward demonstrating a TPC truss structure for a lunar tower configuration. The design, predicated on robotic assembly, uses open section truss elements fused to a joint splice plate, without a structural adhesive. This presentation details the TDEA lunar truss structure design development approach including design heritage, the requirements established, the mechanical design and analyses, and thermal analyses demonstrating structural requirements conformance, as well as planned building block verification efforts either underway or planned. The mechanical analyses show the most severe environment is a moon-quake the truss dynamic responses. The thermal analyses show the extreme cold for on-orbit welding, the window for less severe on-orbit welding, as well as the large thermal gradients on the truss. The building block approach shown includes ultrasonic welding and lap shear coupon testing on various truss element thicknesses and layups. Knockdown factor determinations due to lunar dust contamination (simulated) and effects of welding in a vacuum are presented. The most highly loaded truss joint configuration sub-element verification test matrix is outlined. Lastly, plans to build, inspect, and test a 2-bay truss representative unit cell that is 1.5 meters by 1.5 meters by 3.0 meters tall are detailed.

Lunar Tower↗