Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “tank testing”

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 379 records · Page 21
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Validation of Two Phase Flow Modeling Techniques in Loci-Stream using Axial Jet Pressure Control and Autogenous Pressurization Experiment

Autogenous pressurization of cryogenic propellant tanks eliminates the need to have an additional pressurant tank on the space vehicle, which is highly advantageous due to reduced vehicle mass and design complexity. Autogenous pressurization therefore is one of the key technologies for deep space exploration and long-term space missions. The complex interaction of thermal gradients, turbulence and phase change near the interface make the problem a challenging one to model. Nodal analysis tools and reduced order models are unable to capture the necessary physics. 3-D CFD analyses are necessary to fully characterize autogenous pressurization. CFD analyses pose their own difficulties. The requisite CFD tool to tackle this problem need to be modular with the ability to incorporate various physics models, efficient, and computationally scalable for simulating flight size tanks. NASA MSFC's Loci-Stream CFD tool along with the VOF module is a great candidate to fit this mold. We demonstrate our modeling approach and validation of Loci-Stream for predicting autogenous pressurization of a flight scale propellant tank in order for the solver to serve as a reliable design and analysis tool for NASA's CFM application needs. Liquid hydrogen tank pressurization tests carried out at the MSFC test stand 300 facilities provide reliable validation data for this purpose. These tests were modeled using the Loci-Stream solver with a newly implemented two-phase sharp interface treatment. We show that our modeling approach and CFD solver predict the autogenous pressurization phenomena satisfactorily, and document challenging aspects of modeling this problem.

cryogenic fluid management↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Joule-Thomson Cryogenic Nitrogen Orifice Flows

The Joule-Thomson Effect involves the expansion of a fluid through a throttling device, often a simple orifice, resulting in a change in the fluid's temperature. It has been leveraged in the design and analysis of Thermodynamic Vent Systems and integrated into injector designs for cryogenic no-vent fill tank-to-tank transfer testing. There is a scarcity of comprehensive data available to model the phenomenon effectively using tools such as GFSSP for cryogenic nitrogen flows. This experiment aims to model the Joule-Thomson effect of liquid nitrogen through seven traditionally manufactured, sharp-edged orifices manufactured by O’Keefe and three additively manufactured (AM) orifices manufactured by Cumberland Additive. The traditional orifice sizes were 0.016, 0.02, 0.024, 0.032, 0.037, and 0.04 inch in diameter. The three additive orifices had diameters with target/nominal sizes equal to the 0.016, 0.024, and 0.04 inch O’Keefe orifices. However, the actual diameters of the AM orifices were found to be 0.014, 0.024, and 0.035 inches due to additive manufacturing restrictions. Water was flowed through the orifices to verify that their flow coefficients matched published values and to establish flow coefficients for the AM orifices. Liquid nitrogen was flowed through the orifices in a separate test apparatus. The liquid nitrogen started as a subcooled liquid upstream of the orifice and transitioned into a two-phase gas-liquid mixture after passing through each orifice. The upstream pressure was set to 29 psia, 34 psia, 39 psia, and/or 42 psia or 44 psia. The pressure, temperature, and flow rate were measured upstream and downstream of the orifice for three trials at each set point. The average volumetric flow rate and Joule-Thomson Coefficients were calculated from this data. The AM orifices and traditionally manufactured orifices displayed similar results. This data will refine the dataset GFSSP uses to model the J-T Effect more accurately.

Joule-Thomson↗
NASA NTRS1992

Hydrogen no-vent fill testing in a 5 cubic foot (142 liter) tank using spray nozzle and spray bar liquid injection

A total of 38 hydrogen no-vent fill tests were performed in this test series using various size spray nozzles and a spray bar with different hole sizes in a 5 cubic foot receiver tank. Fill levels of 90 percent by volume or greater were achieved in 26 of the tests while maintaining a receiver tank pressure below 30 psia. Spray nozzles were mounted at the top of the tank, whereas, the spray bar was centered in the tank axially. The spray nozzle no-vent fills demonstrated tank pressure and temperature responses comparable to previous test series. Receiver tank pressure responses for the spray bar configuration were similar to the spray nozzle tests with the pressure initially rising rapidly, then leveling off as vapor condenses onto the discharging liquid streams, and finally ramping up near the end of the test due to ullage compression. Both liquid injection techniques tested were capable of filling the receiver tank to 90 percent under variable test conditions. Comparisons between the spray nozzle and spray bar configurations for well matched test conditions indicate the spray nozzle injection technique is more effective in minimizing the receiving tank pressure throughout a no-vent fill compared to the spray bar under normal gravity conditions.

Moran, Matthew E.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Hydrogen no-vent testing in a 5 cubic foot (142 liter) tank using spray nozzle and spray bar liquid injection

A total of 38 hydrogen no-vent fill tests were performed in this test series using various size spray nozzles and a spray bar with different hole sizes in a 5 cubic foot receiver tank. Fill levels of 90 percent by volume or greater were achieved in 26 of the tests while maintaining a receiver tank pressure below 30 psia. Spray nozzles were mounted at the top of the tank, whereas, the spray bar was centered in the tank axially. The spray nozzle no-vent fills demonstrated tank pressure and temperature responses comparable to previous test series. Receiver tank pressure responses for the spray bar configuration were similar to the spray nozzle tests with the pressure initially rising rapidly, then leveling off as vapor condenses onto the discharging liquid streams, and finally ramping up near the end of the test due to ullage compression. Both liquid injection techniques tested were capable of filling the receiver tank to 90 percent under variable test conditions. Comparisons between the spray nozzle and spray bar configurations for well matched test conditions indicate the spray nozzle injection technique is more effective in minimizing the receiving tank pressure throughout a no-vent fill compared to the spray bar under normal gravity conditions.

Moran, Matthew E.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Findings from the X-33 Hydrogen Tank Failure Investigation

The X-33 Hydrogen tank failed during test in November of 1999 at MSFC. The tank completed the structural loading phase of the test successfully and was drained of hydrogen prior to the failure. The failure initiated in the acreage of Lobe 1 and was instantaneous, peeling the outer skin and core away from the inner skin. It was determined there were several factors that provided the opportunity for the tank to fail in this way. The factor giving life to these opportunistic circumstances was hydrogen infiltration into the core of the tank. The mechanism for this phenomenon will be discussed in this presentation.

Niedermeyer, Melinda↗
NASA NTRS2017

NASA's Space Launch System Takes Shape

Major hardware and software for NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) began rolling off assembly lines in 2016, setting the stage for critical testing in 2017 and the launch of a major new capability for deep space human exploration. SLS continues to pursue a 2018 first launch of Exploration Mission 1 (EM-1). At NASA's Michoud Assembly Facility near New Orleans, LA, Boeing completed welding of structural test and flight liquid hydrogen tanks, and engine sections. Test stands for core stage structural tests at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL. neared completion. The B2 test stand at NASA's Stennis Space Center, MS, completed major structural renovation to support core stage green run testing in 2018. Orbital ATK successfully test fired its second qualification solid rocket motor in the Utah desert and began casting the motor segments for EM-1. Aerojet Rocketdyne completed its series of test firings to adapt the heritage RS-25 engine to SLS performance requirements. Production is under way on the first five new engine controllers. NASA also signed a contract with Aerojet Rocketdyne for propulsion of the RL10 engines for the Exploration Upper Stage. United Launch Alliance delivered the structural test article for the Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage to MSFC for tests and construction was under way on the flight stage. Flight software testing at MSFC, including power quality and command and data handling, was completed. Substantial progress is planned for 2017. Liquid oxygen tank production will be completed at Michoud. Structural testing at Marshall will get under way. RS-25 hotfire testing will verify the new engine controllers. Core stage horizontal integration will begin. The core stage pathfinder mockup will arrive at the B2 test stand for fit checks and tests. EUS will complete preliminary design review. This paper will discuss the technical and programmatic successes and challenges of 2016 and look ahead to plans for 2017.

Askins, Bruce↗
NASA NTRS1994

Method and device for determining bond separation strength using induction heating

An induction heating device includes an induction heating gun which includes a housing, a U-shaped pole piece having two spaced apart opposite ends defining a gap there between, the U-shaped pole piece being mounted in one end of the housing, and a tank circuit including an induction coil wrapped around the pole piece and a capacitor connected to the induction coil. A power source is connected to the tank circuit. A pull test machine is provided having a stationary chuck and a movable chuck, the two chucks holding two test pieces bonded together at a bond region. The heating gun is mounted on the pull test machine in close proximity to the bond region of the two test pieces, whereby when the tank circuit is energized, the two test pieces are heated by induction heating while a tension load is applied to the two test pieces by the pull test machine to determine separation strength of the bond region.

Coultrip, Robert H.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Liquid Oxygen Propellant Densification Production and Performance Test Results With a Large-Scale Flight-Weight Propellant Tank for the X33 RLV

This paper describes in-detail a test program that was initiated at the Glenn Research Center (GRC) involving the cryogenic densification of liquid oxygen (LO2). A large scale LO2 propellant densification system rated for 200 gpm and sized for the X-33 LO2 propellant tank, was designed, fabricated and tested at the GRC. Multiple objectives of the test program included validation of LO2 production unit hardware and characterization of densifier performance at design and transient conditions. First, performance data is presented for an initial series of LO2 densifier screening and check-out tests using densified liquid nitrogen. The second series of tests show performance data collected during LO2 densifier test operations with liquid oxygen as the densified product fluid. An overview of LO2 X-33 tanking operations and load tests with the 20,000 gallon Structural Test Article (STA) are described. Tank loading testing and the thermal stratification that occurs inside of a flight-weight launch vehicle propellant tank were investigated. These operations involved a closed-loop recirculation process of LO2 flow through the densifier and then back into the STA. Finally, in excess of 200,000 gallons of densified LO2 at 120 oR was produced with the propellant densification unit during the demonstration program, an achievement that s never been done before in the realm of large-scale cryogenic tests.

Tomsik, Thomas M.↗
NASA NTRS1977

Heat-transfer test results for a .0275-scale space shuttle external tank with a 10 deg/40 deg double cone-ogive nose in the NASA/AMES 3.5-foot hypersonic wind tunnel (FH14), volume 2

A .0275 scale forebody model of the new baseline configuration of the space shuttle external tank vent cap configuration was tested to determine the flow field due to the double cone configuration. The tests were conducted in a 3.5 foot hypersonic wind tunnel at alpha = -5 deg, -4.59 deg, 0 deg, 5 deg, and 10 deg; beta = 0 deg, -3 deg, -5.51 deg, -6 deg, -9 deg, and +6 deg; nominal freestream Reynolds numbers per foot of 1.5 x 1 million, 3.0 x 1 million, and 5.0 x 1 million; and a nominal Mach number of 5. Separation and reattached flow from thermocouple data, shadowgraphs, and oil flows indicate that separation begins about 80% from the tip of the 10 deg cone, then reattaches on the vent cap and produces fully turbulent flow over most of the model forebody. The hardware disturbs the flow over a much larger area than present TPS application has assumed. A correction to the flow disturbance was experimentally suggested from the results of an additional test run.

Carroll, H. R.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Liquid Rocket Booster (LRB) for the Space Transportation System (STS) systems study. Appendix A: Stress analysis report for the pump-fed and pressure-fed liquid rocket booster

Pressure effects on the pump-fed Liquid Rocket Booster (LRB) of the Space Transportation System are examined. Results from the buckling tests; bending moments tests; barrel, propellant tanks, frame XB1513, nose cone, and intertank tests; and finite element examination of forward and aft skirts are presented.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2008

Technical Progress on the Ares I-X Flight Test

Ares I-X will be NASA's first test flight for a new human-rated launch vehicle since 1981, and the team is well on its way toward completing the vehicle's design and hardware fabrication for an April 2009 launch. This uncrewed suborbital development test flight gives NASA its first opportunities to: gather critical data about the flight dynamics of the integrated launch vehicle; understand how to control its roll during flight; better characterize the stage separation environments during future flight; and demonstrate the first stage recovery system. The Ares I-X Flight Test Vehicle (FTV) incorporates a mix of flight and mockup hardware. It is powered by a four-segment solid rocket booster, and will be modified to include a fifth, spacer segment; the upper stage, Orion crew exploration vehicle, and launch abort system are simulator hardware to make the FTV aerodynamically similar to the same size, shape, and weight of Ares I. The Ares IX first stage includes an existing Shuttle solid rocket motor and thrust vector control system controlled by an Ascent Thrust Vector Controller (ATVC) designed and built by Honeywell International. The avionics system will be tested in a dedicated System Integration Laboratory located at Lockheed Martin Space Systems (LMSS) in Denver, Colorado. The Upper Stage Simulator (USS) is made up of cylindrical segments that will be stacked and integrated at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) for launch. Glenn Research Center is already building these segments, along with their internal access structures. The active Roll Control System (RoCS) includes two thruster units harvested from Peacekeeper missiles. Duty cycle testing for RoCS was conducted, and fuel tanking and detanking tests will occur at KSC in early 2008. This important flight will provide valuable experience for the ground operations team in integrating, stacking, and launching Ares I. Data from Ares I-X will ensure the safety and reliability of America's newest launch vehicle.

Davis, S.R.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Power Reactant Storage Assembly (PRSA) (Space Shuttle). PRSA hydrogen and oxygen DVT tank refurbishment

The Power Reactant Storage Assembly (PRSA) liquid hydrogen Development Verification Test (H2 DVT) tank assembly (Beech Aircraft Corporation P/N 15548-0116-1, S/N 07399000SHT0001) and liquid oxygen (O2) DVT tank assembly (Beech Aircraft Corporation P/N 15548-0115-1, S/N 07399000SXT0001) were refurbished by Ball Electro-Optics and Cryogenics Division to provide NASA JSC, Propulsion and Power Division, the capability of performing engineering tests. The refurbishments incorporated the latest flight configuration hardware and avionics changes necessary to make the tanks function like flight articles. This final report summarizes these refurbishment activities. Also included are up-to-date records of the pressure time and cycle histories.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1991

Description of Liquid Nitrogen Experimental Test Facility

The Liquid Nitrogen Test Facility is a unique test facility for ground-based liquid nitrogen experimentation. The test rig consists of an insulated tank of approximately 12.5 cubic ft in volume, which is supplied with liquid nitrogen from a 300 gal dewar via a vacuum jacketed piping system. The test tank is fitted with pressure and temperature measuring instrumentation, and with two view ports which allow visual observation of test conditions. To demonstrate the capabilities of the facility, the initial test program is briefly described. The objective of the test program is to measure the condensation rate by injecting liquid nitrogen as a subcooled spray into the ullage of a tank 50 percent full of liquid nitrogen at saturated conditions. The condensation rate of the nitrogen vapor on the subcooled spray can be analytically modeled, and results validated and corrected by experimentally measuring the vapor condensation on liquid sprays.

Jurns, John M.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Description of liquid nitrogen experimental test facility

The Liquid Nitrogen Test Facility is a unique test facility for ground-based liquid nitrogen experimentation. The test rig consists of an insulated tank of approximately 12.5 cubic ft in volume, which is supplied with liquid nitrogen from a 300 gal dewar via a vacuum jacketed piping system. The test tank is fitted with pressure and temperature measuring instrumentation, and with two view ports which allow visual observation of test conditions. To demonstrate the capabilities of the facility, the initial test program is briefly described. The objective of the test program is to measure the condensation rate by injecting liquid nitrogen as a subcooled spray into the ullage of a tank 50 percent full of liquid nitrogen at saturated conditions. The condensation rate of the nitrogen vapor on the subcooled spray can be analytically modeled, and results validated and corrected by experimentally measuring the vapor condensation on liquid sprays.

Jurns, J. M.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Cryogenic Pressure Control Modeling for Ellipsoidal Space Tanks

A computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model is developed to simulate pressure control of an ellipsoidal-shaped liquid hydrogen tank under external heating in normal gravity. Pressure control is provided by an axial jet thermodynamic vent system (TVS) centered within the vessel that injects cooler liquid into the tank, mixing the contents and reducing tank pressure. The two-phase cryogenic tank model considers liquid hydrogen in its own vapor with liquid density varying with temperature only and a fully compressible ullage. The axisymmetric model is developed using a custom version of the commercially available FLOW-31) software. Quantitative model validation is ,provided by engineering checkout tests performed at Marshall Space Flight Center in 1999 in support of the Solar Thermal Upper Stage_ Technology Demonstrator (STUSTD) program. The engineering checkout tests provide cryogenic tank self-pressurization test data at various heat leaks and tank fill levels. The predicted self-pressurization rates, ullage and liquid temperatures at discrete locations within the STUSTD tank are in good agreement with test data. The work presented here advances current CFD modeling capabilities for cryogenic pressure control and helps develop a low cost CFD-based design process for space hardware.

Lopez, Alfredo↗
NASA NTRS2016

NASA's Hydrogen Outpost: The Rocket Systems Area at Plum Brook Station

"There was pretty much a general knowledge about hydrogen and its capabilities," recalled former researcher Robert Graham. "The question was, could you use it in a rocket engine? Do we have the technology to handle it? How will it cool? Will it produce so much heat release that we can't cool the engine? These were the questions that we had to address." The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Glenn Research Center, referred to historically as the Lewis Research Center, made a concerted effort to answer these and related questions in the 1950s and 1960s. The center played a critical role transforming hydrogen's theoretical potential into a flight-ready propellant. Since then NASA has utilized liquid hydrogen to send humans and robots to the Moon, propel dozens of spacecraft across the universe, orbit scores of satellite systems, and power 135 space shuttle flights. Rocket pioneers had recognized hydrogen's potential early on, but its extremely low boiling temperature and low density made it impracticable as a fuel. The Lewis laboratory first demonstrated that liquid hydrogen could be safely utilized in rocket and aircraft propulsion systems, then perfected techniques to store, pump, and cleanly burn the fuel, as well as use it to cool the engine. The Rocket Systems Area at Lewis's remote testing area, Plum Brook Station, played a little known, but important role in the center's hydrogen research efforts. This publication focuses on the activities at the Rocket Systems Area, but it also discusses hydrogen's role in NASA's space program and Lewis's overall hydrogen work. The Rocket Systems Area included nine physically modest test sites and three test stands dedicated to liquid-hydrogen-related research. In 1962 Cleveland Plain Dealer reporter Karl Abram claimed, "The rocket facility looks more like a petroleum refinery. Its test rigs sprout pipes, valves and tanks. During the night test runs, excess hydrogen is burned from special stacks in the best Oklahoma oil field tradition." Besides the Rocket Systems Area, Plum Brook Station also included a nuclear test reactor, a large vacuum tank, a hypersonic wind tunnel, and a full-scale upper-stage rocket stand. The Rocket Systems Area operated from 1961 until NASA shut down all of Plum Brook in 1974. The center reopened Plum Brook in the late 1980s and continues to use several test facilities. The Rocket Systems Area, however, was not restored. Today Plum Brook resembles a nature preserve more than an oil refinery. Lush fields and forests separate the large test facilities. Until recently, the abandoned Rocket Systems Area structures and equipment were visible amongst the greenery. These space-age ruins, particularly the three towers, stood as silent sentinels over the sparsely populated reservation. Few knew the story of these mysterious facilities when NASA removed them in the late 2000s.

Rocket Systems↗