Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “engine qualification”

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 397 records · Page 22

Summary of JAYGO mixing and FSM-1 application of castable inhibitor and liner

Two JAYGO planetary mixers (12 and 42 gallon) are being qualified to mix STW5-3224 liner and STW5-3223 castable inhibitor. These mixers are an integral part of a mix process which allows for safe addition of the asbestos component. An essential part of the engineering evaluation (ETP-0347) of these mixers is the generation of static test fire data. Ultimately, these results will help confirm the adequacy of these mixers for production mixing of liner and inhibitor. (These data are not required for qualification of the Certification Test Plan CTP-0125). The details on the mixing, inhibiting, and sling-lining of JAYGO-mixed castable inhibitor and liner which were applied to the FSM-1 segments are presented. The objectives are the following: (1) to document processing events surrounding the JAYO mixing of castable inhibitor and liner, and the subsequent inhibiting and sling lining onto the FSM-1 segments; and (2) to substantiate the measured properties of these JAYGO-mixed materials (rheological and mechanical) and compare these properties to existing production database.

Evans, Kurt B.↗

Materials And Processes Technical Information System (MAPTIS) LDEF materials database

The Materials and Processes Technical Information System (MAPTIS) is a collection of materials data which was computerized and is available to engineers in the aerospace community involved in the design and development of spacecraft and related hardware. Consisting of various database segments, MAPTIS provides the user with information such as material properties, test data derived from tests specifically conducted for qualification of materials for use in space, verification and control, project management, material information, and various administrative requirements. A recent addition to the project management segment consists of materials data derived from the LDEF flight. This tremendous quantity of data consists of both pre-flight and post-flight data in such diverse areas as optical/thermal, mechanical and electrical properties, atomic concentration surface analysis data, as well as general data such as sample placement on the satellite, A-O flux, equivalent sun hours, etc. Each data point is referenced to the primary investigator(s) and the published paper from which the data was taken. The MAPTIS system is envisioned to become the central location for all LDEF materials data. This paper consists of multiple parts, comprising a general overview of the MAPTIS System and the types of data contained within, and the specific LDEF data element and the data contained in that segment.

Davis, John M.↗

Recommendations on the Use of Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) Parts for NASA Missions - Phase II

This assessment had two Phases. Phase I captured NASA Centers’ current practices for commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) parts 1 used in spaceflight systems and ground support equipment (available at https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20205011579) [ref. 1]. The Phase II report provides guidance for selecting and using COTS parts in NASA missions. The approaches proposed in this report differ from current agency practices. This top-level executive summary touches on these new approaches for using COTS parts but does not provide the detailed information that is critical in understanding the rationale behind these new approaches. Readers will need to read the entire report to gain full understanding and effectively use the recommendations herein. NASA’s historical approach to selecting and applying parts has been to define certain parts, primarily specific classes of military specification (MIL-SPEC) parts, as “standard”, leaving all others, including COTS parts, as nonstandard. Standard parts typically are used without further testing (“use-as-is”). Nonstandard parts are subjected to initial screening and subsequent lot acceptance testing of representative samples from each procured lot per MIL-SPEC or similar requirements. Decades later, top-tier commercial part manufacturers have evolved significant manufacturing, statistical control, and technological improvements that can now provide parts as reliable or more reliable than MIL-SPEC parts, when used within their datasheet limits. Concurrently, the space science and exploration community’s needs demand technological advances unavailable with MIL-SPEC parts. This ongoing change necessitates using COTS parts for space missions. Properly selected COTS parts in appropriate applications can offer performance and supply availability advantages compared to MIL-SPEC parts. Their utility and demonstrated reliability result from large volumes and automated production and testing processes. However, careful review and a thorough understanding of their specifications (i.e., datasheet limitations) is needed, and verifying that manufacturer specifications and reliability meet space hardware application needs are necessary. This report recommends MIL-SPEC screening and non-radiation-related lot acceptance testing be reduced or eliminated in cases where evidence of sufficient quality and reliability exists for COTS parts. The extent of NASA's insight into COTS manufacturers and the amount and nature of the needed evidence will differ by mission and will likely be driven by a mission's resources and associated risk posture. To facilitate this goal, two new terminologies have been defined and described: “Industry Leading Parts Manufacturer (ILPM)” and “Established COTS parts.” An ILPM is a COTS manufacturer that produces high quality and reliable parts. Some parts produced by ILPMs, defined as Established COTS parts, do not need any additional MIL-SPEC or NASA screening and lot acceptance testing to be used in space applications. This report provides guidance for selecting, procuring, and applying COTS parts and for performing part-, board-, and system-level COTS parts verification. The recommendation to select Established COTS parts from ILPMs will assure those COTS parts will have comparable quality to corresponding MIL-SPEC parts. Selecting, applying, and verifying Established COTS parts from ILPMs requires a holistic team approach, engaging parts engineers, circuit designers, quality, reliability, and systems engineers, procurement specialists, radiation specialists, avionics leads, and program/project managers. A mission-specific approach tailored to a project’s Mission, Environment, Applications and Lifetime (MEAL) [ref. 2] requirements should be developed and approved by program/project managers. Any associated risks should be clearly identified, quantified, mitigated, and/or accepted. Different approaches are recommended according to program/project Risk Classes A, B, C, and D [ref. 3] and human-rated missions [ref. 4]: 1. Recommend Classes A and B and human-rated missions consider a “MIL-SPEC parts- based design” approach. ”MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach is one in which most parts are MIL-SPEC parts and Established COTS parts from ILPMs are used only when an equivalent MIL-SPEC part does not meet functional or size, weight, and power (SWaP) or performance requirements, or is not available. 2. Recommend Classes D and Sub-D missions consider a “System of COTS” approach. “System of COTS” approach is one which most parts are Established COTS parts from ILPMs. 3. Recommend Class C missions determine which approach is the best for their projects; that is, use either a “MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach, “System of COTS” approach, or a combined approach utilizing elements of both. This report intends to provide guidance in using COTS parts for NASA missions with risk classifications of A through D and human-rated missions; but it does not address the costs of using COTS parts. Costs of using COTS parts in different NASA mission classes can vary significantly even if the same parts are used in different risk postures, due to differing verification levels needed. The guidance does not distinguish between critical or non-critical systems, and a given project will need to apply the appropriate guidance based on their risk posture. The intended audience of this report are NASA personnel and commercial practitioners who support NASA’s spaceflight missions, including spaceflight program or project managers, parts engineers, parts manufacturers, radiation engineers, avionics engineers, system engineers, circuit design engineers, reliability engineers, safety and mission assurance (SMA) personnel, and parts procurement specialists. The NEPP Program will perform a pathfinder study to explore implementing the guidance in this NESC report. An ILPM verification process is not the same as conventional vendor qualification processes performed according to military standards and specifications. This NESC report intends to provide guidance in utilizing available parts data from ILPM manufacturers for parts assurance assessments needed for NASA missions. The report also captured the current practices from DoD and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in Section 10. Note each DoD and FAA report was provided by the corresponding agencies regarding their practices, which are independent from the NESC recommendations in the report.

Commercial-Off-The-Shelf↗

Process Qualification Concepts in NASA-STD-6030

- Terminology - Definition and role of QMP in the NASA-STD-6030 framework - Qualification checklist for evaluating a candidate AM material process - Types of data needed to evaluate the metrics for a QMP - Advocacy for a singular, contained data entity that enables QMP evaluation and other aspects of the AM ecosystem - Material Engineering Equivalence Baseline - Discussion of Material Engineering Equivalence concepts - Summary

Doug Wells↗

High Temperature Devices for Aerospace Applications

This presentation will overview important new capabilities and benefits that next-generation higher temperature electronics promise for a variety of aerospace systems and missions. Initial aerospace infusions of higher temperature electronics to be discussed include jet engines and the prolonged robotic exploration of the Venus surface. Complete redesign of systems compared to prior conventional electronics practices would yield the most revolutionary benefits. However, the inherent higher risk and expense associated with new technology adoption will likely drive a more evolutionary technology infusion process, especially since flight qualification demands large safety margins and testing that ensures reliable operation for far longer than actual mission duration. SiC pn-junction based devices are inherently capable of the most durable operation at the highest application temperatures compared other transistor technologies, but such integrated circuits (ICs) will never achieve integration levels near today’s silicon ICs. Extreme temperature high-power devices will also be de-rated compared to room-temperature performance. While the high temperature market will always be small compared to the conventional temperature mass-market, compatibility and leveraging of existing foundry manufacturing is vital to the establishment of a sustainable high temperature electronics ecosystem sufficient to significantly improve aerospace systems.

High Temperature↗

TRUST Sensors in Environments: Accelerometers (SE-A) Report, Release FY24

The objective of the Delivery Environments (DE) Testbeds to Reduce Uncertainty in Simulations and Tests (TRUST) project is to quantify and help increase confidence in specific areas of computational and experimental capabilities that are applicable to the development, on-target assessment, and qualification of current and future delivery environments. The TRUST project consists of five "low-complexity", single-feature testbeds used to conduct experiments with accompanying models and simulations. Each of the five single feature testbeds aims to isolate an engineering feature or behavior of interest, then work towards improving the fundamental engineering understanding of that feature. Additionally, the single feature testbeds are used to identify capability development needs that can help reduce model and experimental uncertainty.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

TRUST Sensors in Environments: Accelerometers (SE-A) Report Release FY25

The objective of the Delivery Environments (DE) Testbeds to Reduce Uncertainty in Simulations and Tests (TRUST) project is to quantify and help increase confidence in specific areas of computa tional and experimental capabilities that are applicable to the development, on-target assessment, and qualification of current and future delivery environments. The TRUST project consists of five "low-complexity", single-feature testbeds used to conduct experiments with accompanying models and simulations. Each of the five single feature testbeds aims to isolate an engineering feature or behavior of interest, then work towards improving the fundamental engineering understanding of that feature. Additionally, the single feature testbeds are used to identify capability development needs that can help reduce model and experimental uncertainty.

42 ENGINEERING↗

Parts Engineering Experiences, Philosophies and Trends

This document is the presentation viewgraphs of the NASA presentations to NASDA, outlining the philosophy and trends of the experiences with engineering parts. Included in the presentations: are (1) the assurance of COTS boards for Space flight, and (2) Peer Review for Ice, Cloud and land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) GPS flight receivers EEE parts. The emphasis is on the methods for qualification of available parts for space flight.

Shaw, Harry↗

Return to Flight Resource Reel 2 of 2

A continuation of the tests performed on the Space Shuttle Discovery in preparation for its return to flight is presented. The tests include: 1) Shuttle Robot Arm Recertification; 2) Michael Hiltz Systems Group Leader; 3) Orbiter Boom Fabrication; 4) Orbiter Boom Final Development; 5) Gary Searle Manager of Orbiter Boom Sensor System (OBSS) Manufacturing and Assembly; 6) Orbiter Boom Qualification Unit; 7) STS-114 Crew Inspects Orbiter Boom at Kennedy Space Center; 8) Orbiter Boom Inspection of Thermal Protection System Animation; 9) External Tank Bipod Redesign; 10) External Tank Flange Redesign; 11) External Tank Bellows Redesign; 12) Shuttle Main Engine Testing and Delivery to Kennedy Space Center; 13) Ronnie Rigney Project Manager Space Shuttle Main Engine Program Office; 14) Gene Goldmman NASA Project Manager Space Shuttle Main Engine Project; 15) Mike Cosgrove Boeing-Rocketdyne Flow Manager; 16) Shuttle Rocket Booster Build-Up; 17) Ascent Imagery Improvements; and 18) STS-114 Flight Control Team and Mission Management Team.

Source record↗

Development and Qualification of Alternate Blowing Agents for Space Shuttle External Tank Thermal Protection System

The Aerospace industry has a long history of using low density polyurethane and polyurethane-modified isocyanurate foam systems as lightweight, low cost, easily processed cryogenic Thermal Protection Systems (TPS) for ascent vehicles. The Thermal Protection System of the Space Shuttle External Tank (ET) is required so that quality liquid cryogenic propellant can be supplied to the Orbiter main engines and to protect the metal structure of the tanks from becoming too hot from aerodynamic heating, hence preventing premature break-up of the tank. These foams are all blown with CFC-1 I blowing agent which has been identified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as an ozone depleting substance. CFCs will not be manufactured after 1995, Consequently, alternate blowing agent substances must be identified and implemented to assure continued ET manufacture and delivery. This paper describes the various testing performed to select and qualify HCFC-1 41 b as a near term drop-in replacement for CFC-11. Although originally intended to be a one for one substitution in the formulation, several technical issues were identified regarding material performance and processability which required both formulation changes and special processing considerations to overcome. In order to evaluate these material changes, each material was subjected to various tests to qualify them to meet the various loads imposed on them during long term storage, pre-launch operations, launch, separation and re-entry. Each material was tested for structural, thermal, aeroshear, and stress/strain loads for the various flight environments each encounters. Details of the development and qualification program and the resolution of specific problems are discussed in this paper.

Williams, Charles W.↗

SYS800 Report Diagrams (Working copies) [Slides]

Currently the black box system is in the design and development phase. As the system design undergoes qualification & transitions to the production phase it will be key to evaluate, determine and integrate accident based requirements and capabilities into the design.

42 ENGINEERING↗

High Yield Xray Imager Final Design Review

The High Yield Xray Imager (HYXI) is a new NIF target diagnostic system currently under development. The goal of HYXI is to provide high-fidelity, high temporal resolution x-ray imaging capability on high yield NIF implosions at 10MJ and above. The HYXI instrument design concept is based on the combination of two technologies that have been successfully utilized at the NIF on previous instruments, electron pulse-dilation and hybrid-CMOS sensor imaging. The combination of these two techniques will give HYXI sufficient data quality to ascertain differences in hot spot formation dynamics between high and low yield implosions. This information will highlight the critical hot spot conditions needed for ignition and burn. The HYXI design leverages the successful operation of the PDIXI x-ray imager at the NIF on multi MJ yield shots. A new radiation tolerant CMOS imaging array (HYPERION) is being developed to eliminate the significant background noise which limits the data quality of PDIXI. We successfully placed the contract with Advanced hCMOS Systems (AHS) to develop the HYPERION sensor, which fulfils our criteria to place long lead time item procurements by end of FY24. The HYXI Final Design Review was completed at the end of Q4 FY24 (Sep 24 th and Sep 30 th ). The HYXI project is a multi-year effort with a phased approach to be bring up system functionality over time in parallel with the development and fabrication effort of the HYPERION CMOS imaging array. In Phase 1, time-integrated x-ray images on NIF DT experiments will be collected starting in Q3 FY25. In Phase 2 of the project, time-resolved imaging with HYXI utilizing a spare microchannel plate detector back-end will begin in Q3 FY26. Phase 3 concludes the project with the installation of the HYPERION sensor array and the final performance qualification of the HYXI instrument which is scheduled for Q3 FY27 as discussed in the PDR and MRT report on this project in FY23.

42 ENGINEERING↗

Orion Capsule Parachute Assembly System (CPAS) Overload Testing Approach and Results

The qualification of the Orion Capsule Parachute Assembly System (CPAS) system includes exposure to loads and dynamic pressures above the required values as validation of the parachutes' structural integrity. As outlined in the certification plan, each of the four parachutes of the system are to be subjected to 110% of their respective maximum dynamic pressure requirements. The Main and Drogue parachutes have satisfied this overload condition in drop testing and due to cost and schedule constraints, the Forward Bay Cover Parachute (FBCP) and Pilot parachute were subjected to the overload condition in the ground testing described in this document. The test objectives and pass/fail criteria were established and require the parachutes to achieve and maintain a target riser load (associated with a minimum of 110% dynamic pressure overload) for a minimum of three seconds while sustaining no failures of any structural members (vent hoop, radials, suspension line) or any damage which propagates into catastrophic failure of the canopy. Considering the assumptions and limitations associated with the ground testing (primarily non-uniform flow field of the ground test system and variations in parachute manufacturing), a method of establishing the desired overload condition was determined by the technical community and covers the 2-sigma bounds of the drag area distribution derived from drop testing. On June 27, 2017 the testing was executed at the High Velocity Airflow System (HiVAS) facility located at the Weapon Survivability Laboratory (WSL) at the Naval Air Warfare Center, Weapons Division (NAWCWD) China Lake. Engineering Development Unit (EDU) parachutes were used as pathfinders to gain experience with achieving the test conditions. Additional runs were executed to measure the airflow at the same location as the canopy skirt, although this data is not required to satisfy the test objectives and parachute pass/fail criteria. The qualification parachutes were successfully exposed to the target conditions and sustained only minor damage.

Daum, Jared S.↗

Progress in Technology Validation of the Next Ion Propulsion System

The NASA's Evolutionary Xenon Thruster (NEXT) ion propulsion system has been in advanced technology development under the NASA In-Space Propulsion Technology project. The highest fidelity hardware planned has now been completed by the government/industry team, including a flight prototype model (PM) thruster, an engineering model (EM) power processing unit, EM propellant management assemblies, a breadboard gimbal, and control unit simulators. Subsystem and system level technology validation testing is in progress. To achieve the objective Technology Readiness Level 6, environmental testing is being conducted to qualification levels in ground facilities simulating the space environment. Additional tests have been conducted to characterize the performance range and life capability of the NEXT thruster. This paper presents the status and results of technology validation testing accomplished to date, the validated subsystem and system capabilities, and the plans for completion of this phase of NEXT development.

Benson, Scott W.↗

Technology Readiness of the NEXT Ion Propulsion System

The NASA's Evolutionary Xenon Thruster (NEXT) ion propulsion system has been in advanced technology development under the NASA In-Space Propulsion Technology project. The highest fidelity hardware planned has now been completed by the government/industry team, including: a flight prototype model (PM) thruster, an engineering model (EM) power processing unit, EM propellant management assemblies, a breadboard gimbal, and control unit simulators. Subsystem and system level technology validation testing is in progress. To achieve the objective Technology Readiness Level 6, environmental testing is being conducted to qualification levels in ground facilities simulating the space environment. Additional tests have been conducted to characterize the performance range and life capability of the NEXT thruster. This paper presents the status and results of technology validation testing accomplished to date, the validated subsystem and system capabilities, and the plans for completion of this phase of NEXT development. The next round of competed planetary science mission announcements of opportunity, and directed mission decisions, are anticipated to occur in 2008 and 2009. Progress to date, and the success of on-going technology validation, indicate that the NEXT ion propulsion system will be a primary candidate for mission consideration in these upcoming opportunities.

Benson, Scott W.↗

12-kW Advanced Electric Propulsion System Hall Current Thruster Qualification and Production Status

The AEPS contract was awarded to AR in May of 2016 with the goal of developing a 12.5kW Hall Thruster System, including the Hall Current Thruster (HCT), Power Processor Unit (PPU) and Xenon Flow Controller (XFC). It was originally targeted to support the Asteroid Redirect Mission, which was cancelled early in the project. The project was subsequently restructured to support the Gateway PPE propulsion mission, with modified scope that consisted of the development, qualification and delivery of three 12kW flight thrusters. The PPU and XFC components were designed and development hardware fabricated with initial testing performed prior to being de-scoped from the contract. System level testing was performed by AR using these engineering components in early 2022 at the Aerospace Corporation’s EP-3 test facility.

Hall thruster↗

Environmental Conditions for Space Flight Hardware: A Survey

Interest in generalization of the physical environment experienced by NASA hardware from the natural Earth environment (on the launch pad), man-made environment on Earth (storage acceptance an d qualification testing), the launch environment, and the space environment, is ed to find commonality among our hardware in an effort to reduce cost and complexity. NASA is entering a period of increase in its number of planetary missions and it is important to understand how our qualification requirements will evolve with and track these new environments. Environmental conditions are described for NASA projects in several ways for the different periods of the mission life cycle. At the beginning, the mission manager defines survivability requirements based on the mission length, orbit, launch date, launch vehicle, and other factors . such as the use of reactor engines. Margins are then applied to these values (temperature extremes, vibration extremes, radiation tolerances, etc,) and a new set of conditions is generalized for design requirements. Mission assurance documents will then assign an additional margin for reliability, and a third set of values is provided for during testing. A fourth set of environmental condition values may evolve intermittently from heritage hardware that has been tested to a level beyond the actual mission requirement. These various sets of environment figures can make it quite confusing and difficult to capture common hardware environmental requirements. Environmental requirement information can be found in a wide variety of places. The most obvious is with the individual projects. We can easily get answers to questions about temperature extremes being used and radiation tolerance goals, but it is more difficult to map the answers to the process that created these requirements: for design, for qualification, and for actual environment with no margin applied. Not everyone assigned to a NASA project may have that kind of insight, as many have only the environmental requirement numbers needed to do their jobs but do not necessarily have a programmatic-level understanding of how all of the environmental requirements fit together.

Plante, Jeannette↗

High Flux Isotope Reactor Low-Enriched Uranium Low Density Silicide Fuel Design Parameters

High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) highly enriched uranium (HEU) to low-enriched uranium (LEU) conversion activities are ongoing as part of the Department of Energy (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)’s nuclear nonproliferation mission. Design activities studying the conversion of HFIR from HEU to LEU fuel explored different fuel design features and shapes with a low density uranium-silicide dispersion (U 3 Si 2 -Al) fuel, which has a uranium density of 4.8 gU/cm 3 . The goal of these studies is to generate several HFIR LEU fuel designs of varying fuel fabrication complexity that meet the current HEU performance metrics and safety requirements. The documented designs will serve as references for fuel fabrication and qualification activities. Recent advancements in modeling and simulation tools enable quick prototyping of fuel designs. Shift, a Monte Carlo neutron transport and depletion tool optimized for high-performance computing (HPC) architectures, is used for efficient fuel cycle and performance metrics calculations. The HFIR Steady State Heat Transfer Code (HSSHTC) is used to vet the thermal safety margin. Also, a new automation tool that connects all fuel design analysis steps, named Python HFIR Analysis and Measurement Engine (PHAME), has been developed to expedite the design study in an efficient and reproducible manner. Leveraging these tools, several candidate fuel designs were selected for varying fabrication complexity. This report provides design feature details for four selected HFIR LEU low density U 3 Si 2 -Al fuel designs and their corresponding performance and safety metrics. Nominal, best-estimate design parameters and irradiation conditions, including fission rate densities, power densities, heat fluxes, and cumulative fission densities are provided for candidate fuel designs relevant to framing irradiation experiments to support fuel qualification efforts. Simulations show that the low density U 3 Si 2 -Al, with design features to enhance safety, can meet HEU core performance metrics and safety requirements if the reactor power is increased from 85 MW (HEU) to 95 MW (LEU) and if the active fuel length is increased from 50.80 cm (HEU) to 55.88 cm (LEU).

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗