SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
This presentation covers industry input received for future work in NASA Aeronautics over the next 5 years. It is intended to present areas of significant imput and to stimulate further discussion.
The purpose of this testing was to characterize the Texas Instruments SNV54LVC00AW for single-event latchup (SEL) in support of a NASA GSFC flight program. The SNV54LVC00A quadruple 2-input positive-NAND gate. These devices were tested at the Berkeley Accelerator Space Effects (BASE) Facility at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) where they were irradiated with the 10 MeV/amu heavy ion cocktail.
A system identification analysis was performed to determine reduced-order models of a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) solver for linear aeroelastic analysis and control design. The application was to the FUN3D code and the flexible half-span wind tunnel test article, in transonic flow conditions, used in the NASA-Boeing collaboration called the Integrated Adaptive Wing Technology Maturation (IAWTM) project. Multiple inputs (structural mode displacements and control surface deflections) were simultaneously excited with orthogonal phase-optimized multisines and multiple outputs (generalized aerodynamic forces) were recorded, from which the matrix of frequency responses were computed using a single CFD run. A state-space model was then fit to the frequency response data using a maximum-likelihood estimator.
A system identification analysis was performed to determine a reduced-order model (ROM) of a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) solver in support of linear aeroservoelastic model development and feedback control design. The approach was applied to the FUN3D code for the half-span wind tunnel test article used in the NASA-Boeing collaboration called the Integrated Adaptive Wing Technology Maturation (IAWTM) project. In a transonic flow condition, multiple inputs (11 structural mode displacements and 3 control surface deflections) were simultaneously excited with orthogonal phase-optimized multisines while multiple outputs (the corresponding 14 generalized aerodynamic forces) were recorded. From these recorded times series, the matrix of frequency responses was computed and subsequently fit using rational function approximations (RFAs). It was found that the entire (14 x 14) matrix of frequency responses could be determined from a single CFD run and that results generally followed trends predicted using other methods. Differences were attributed to the modeling fidelity and nonlinearities from structural mode and control surface interactions at higher reduced frequencies. More accurate fits of the RFAs to the frequency response data were obtained by making two CFD runs, one with only structural mode excitations and one with only control surface excitations, which reduced the degree of nonlinearity in the modeling data.
The input output unit (IOU) for the Attitude and Articulation Subsystem (AACS) for the Cassini spacecraft uses an embedded microprocessor to format and interpret data packets sent over a bus. This new approach is part of a trend toward "smart" peripherals and instruments communicating over much higher bandwidth optical buses.
The return of scientifically selected samples from Mars would provide a rare opportunity forinvestigation with the full range of the latest technology available, but to take full advantageof this opportunity, it is important to plan ahead to ensure the pristine nature of the samplesupon arrival within the Earth environment until scientific investigations can begin.The NASA/ESA science community-driven MSR Science Planning Group – Phase 2 (MSPG2)delivered recommendations and guidance regarding curation (1) and science (2, 3) activities tobe performed on the samples under containment. High-level requirements for the infrastruc-ture were also developed by MSPG2 (4). In order to prepare infrastructure-targeted input forthe ESA and NASA facility studies planned in the 2022-2023 timeframe, the agency-led MSROperational Scenarios Definition Team (MOSDT) was assembled to conceptualize the sampleoperations that will inform future architecture teams. Emphasis was placed on the respon-sibility of MOSDT to use community-defined requirements and to represent the view of the international scientific community.All necessary and sufficient instruments and analytical needs described in MSPG2 were inte-grated in MOSDT main deliverable, the operational workflow (see Hays et al, this conference).In MSPG2, notional instruments were split between curation analytical needs, and objective-driven (time-sensitive and sterilization-sensitive) science analytical needs. In MOSDT, whilethe first phases of curation, “pre-Basic Characterization” and “Basic Characterization” wererather streamlined and separate from other analytical needs, “Preliminary Examination” and“Science” instruments were not always physically segregated. In addition to the necessary andsufficient instruments described by MSPG2, the MOSDT recommended additional supportequipment for sterilization, cleanliness and contamination monitoring.It was sometimes necessary for the MOSDT to rely on assumptions to integrate instruments inthe activity workflow. In general, the assumptions were very conservative to limit contaminationand cross-contamination risks. It is expected that future work to refine limits of contaminationwill enable optimization of instrumentation.The community was consulted during the course of the MOSDT work. This abstract’s aimis two-fold: on one hand, inform the scientific community and overall MSR stakeholders, tobring their attention on the analytical needs currently considered as necessary and sufficient;on the other hand, to solicit feedback from a larger community audience to optimize and refineanalytical needs during the next phases of MSR ground-segment preparation.Disclaimer: The decision to implement Mars Sample Return will not be finalized until NASA’scompletion of the program’s National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. This docu-ment is being made available for informational purposes only.[1] Tait et al. (2021) Preliminary planning for Mars Sample Return (MSR) curation activities ina Sample Receiving Facility (SRF). Astrobiology in press, doi:10.1089/ast.2021.0105. [2] Toscaet al. (2021) Time-sensitive aspects of Mars Sample Return (MSR) science. Astrobiologyin press, doi:10.1089/ast.2021.0115. [3] Velbel et al. (2021) Planning implications relatedto sterilization-sensitive science investigations associated with Mars Sample Return (MSR).Astrobiology in press, doi:10.1089/ast.2021.0113. [4] Carrier et al. (2021) Science and curationconsiderations for the design of a Mars Sample Return (MSR) Sample Receiving Facility (SRF).Astrobiology in press, doi:10.1089/ast.2021.0110.
The return of scientifically selected samples from Mars would provide a rare opportunity for investigation with the full range of the latest technology available. To take full advantage of this opportunity, it is important to plan ahead to ensure the pristine nature of the samples upon arrival within the Earth environment until scientific investigations can begin. The NASA/ESA science community-driven MSR Science Planning Group – Phase 2 (MSPG2) delivered recommendations and guidance regarding curation (1) and science (2,3) activities to be performed on the samples under containment. High-level requirements for the infrastructure were also developed by MSPG2 (4). In order to prepare infrastructure-targeted input for the ESA and NASA facility studies planned in the 2022-2023 timeframe, the MSR agency-led Operational Scenarios Definition Team (MOSDT) was assembled to conceptualize the sample operations that will inform future architecture teams. Emphasis was placed on the responsibility of MOSDT to use community-defined requirements and to represent the view of the international scientific community. The main deliverable of MOSDT was an operational workflow for a Sample Receiving Facility (SRF). Two other deliverables were produced: a report to narrate the workflow, and a list of instruments (see Hutzler et al., this conference). Activities described in the main sequence of the workflow range from engineering operations to curation to science, with the latter term being used here as the science to be done within a SRF. Side sequences (e.g. engineering inspection of hardware, head gas extraction) were also identified, and detailed when they would have a significant impact on the infrastructure of a SRF. It was necessary for the MOSDT to rely on assumptions for some steps and activities, and though these were kept to a minimum (and are described in both the report supporting the workflow and in the full presentation), in general, the assumptions and overall work were very conservative, as the impact of underestimating the scope of the SRF infrastructure was considered more detrimental than overestimating it. It is expected that future work will be able to confirm or inform these assumptions. The community was consulted during the course of the MOSDT work. This abstract’s aim is two-fold: on one hand, inform the scientific community and overall MSR stakeholders, to make the infrastructure studies and trade-off more understandable; on the other hand, to solicit feedback from a larger community audience for the next iterations planning for SRF design and activities.
Arctic Ocean physical and biogeochemical properties are strongly influenced by freshwater input from land and through the Bering Strait, where the mean currents transport water northward from the Bering Sea. The Yukon River is one of the largest rivers in North America and the Arctic, contributing large quantities of freshwater and terrigenous material to the coastal ocean in the northern Bering Sea. However, a detailed analysis of the coastal hydrodynamics at the outflow of the river has not been conducted in this remote but regionally important river. A three-dimensional hydrodynamic model was built to represent the lower Yukon River and coastal ocean for the ice-free months in 7 years. On average, a large anticyclonic eddy persisted at the main outflow of the Yukon that recirculates water back toward the coast where the currents converge to form a mean northward transport along the delta. Interannual spatial variance in salinity was relatively small, while there was substantial variance in u and v current velocity. u velocity spatial variance was correlated to the volume of freshwater discharge across years, while v velocity spatial variance was correlated to the N–S wind velocity. During strong wind events, plume structure was substantially altered: southerly winds deepened the plume and enhanced northward transport, while northerly winds shoaled and strengthened the pycnocline, and reversed the flow toward the south. The variability in plume dispersion on short time scales due to wind forcing has implications for where terrigenous material is processed in and settles out of the water column.
Calculated admittance of coaxial cable onto flat dielectric covered ground slab
In pattern recognition and classification for spatio-temporal problems, one of the most challenging tasks is to provide a good and valid solution in real-time. Because of time constraints, software-based neural network approaches may not be suitable for practical use. Hardware solutions seem to be good candidates for this class of problems. Currently, the Three Dimensional Analog Neural Network (3-DANN) is an effective approach to solving spatio-temporal problems in three-dimensional hardware.
Algorithms for the solution of spatio-temporal recognition and classification problems are known to require intense image data computation.
This paper is intended to evaluate the sample collection process with respect to sample characterization and decision making. In some cases, it may be sufficient to know whether a given outcrop or hand sample is the same as or different from previous sampling localities or samples. In other cases, it may be important to have more in-depth characterization of the sample, such as basic composition, mineralogy, and petrology, in order to effectively identify the best sample. Contextual field observations, in situ/handheld analysis, and backroom evaluation may all play a role in understanding field lithologies and their importance for return. For example, whether a rock is a breccia or a clast-laden impact melt may be difficult based on a single sample, but becomes clear as exploration of a field site puts it into context. The FINESSE (Field Investigations to Enable Solar System Science and Exploration) team is a new activity focused on a science and exploration field based research program aimed at generating strategic knowledge in preparation for the human and robotic exploration of the Moon, near-Earth asteroids (NEAs) and Phobos and Deimos. We used the FINESSE field excursion to the West Clearwater Lake Impact structure (WCIS) as an opportunity to test factors related to sampling decisions. In contract to other technology-driven NASA analog studies, The FINESSE WCIS activity is science-focused, and moreover, is sampling-focused, with the explicit intent to return the best samples for geochronology studies in the laboratory. This specific objective effectively reduces the number of variables in the goals of the field test and enables a more controlled investigation of the role of the crewmember in selecting samples. We formulated one hypothesis to test: that providing details regarding the analytical fate of the samples (e.g. geochronology, XRF/XRD, etc.) to the crew prior to their traverse will result in samples that are more likely to meet specific analytical objectives than samples collected in the absence of this premission information. We conducted three tests of this hypothesis. Our investigation was designed to document processes, tools and procedures for crew sampling of planetary targets. This is not meant to be a blind, controlled test of crew efficacy, but rather an effort to recognize the relevant variables that enter into sampling protocol and to develop recommendations for crew and backroom training in future endeavors. Methods: One of the primary FINESSE field deployment objectives was to collect impact melt rocks and impact melt-bearing breccias from a number of locations around the WCIS structure to enable high precision geochronology of the crater to be performed [1]. We conducted three tests at WCIS after two full days of team participation in field site activities, including using remote sensing data and geologic maps, hiking overland to become familiar with the terrain, and examining previously-collected samples from other islands. In addition, the team members shared their projects and techniques with the entire team. We chose our "crew members" as volunteers from the team, all of whom had had moderate training in geologic fieldwork and became familiar with the general field setting. The first two tests were short, focused tests of our hypothesis. Test A was to obtain hydrothermal vugs; Test B was to obtain impact melt and intrusive rock as well as the contact between the two to check for contact metamorphism and age differences. In both cases, the test director had prior knowledge of the site geology and had developed a study-specific objective for sampling prior to deployment. Prior to the field deployment, the crewmember was briefed on the sampling objective and the laboratory techniques that would be used on the samples. At the field sites (Fig. 2), the crewmember was given 30 minutes to survey a small section of outcrop (10-15 m) and acquire a suite of three samples. The crewmember talked through his process and the test director kept track of the timeline in verbal cues to the crewmember. At the conclusion, the team member conducting the scientific study appraised the samples and train of thought. Test C was a 90-minute EVA simulation using two crewmembers working out of line-of-sight in communication with a science backroom. The science objectives were determined by the science backroom team in advance using a Gigapan image of the outcrop (Fig. 1). The science team formulated hypotheses for the outcrop units and created sampling objectives for impact-melt lithologies; the science team turned these into a science plan, which they communicated to the crew in camp prior to crew deployment. As part of the science plan, the science team also discussed their sample needs in depth with the crewmembers, including laboratory methods, objectives, and samples sizes needed. During the deployment, the two crewmembers relayed real-time information to the science backroom by radio with no time delay. Both the crew and science team re-evaluated their hypotheses and science plans in real-time. Discussion: Upon evaluation, we found that the focused tests (Tests A and B) were successful in meeting their scientific objectives. The crewmember used their knowledge of how the samples were to be used in further study (technique, sample size, and scientific need) to focus on the sampling task. The crewmember was comfortable spending minimal time describing and mapping the outcrop. The crewmember used all available time to get a good sample. The larger test was unsuccessful in meeting the sampling objectives. When the crewmembers began describing the lithologies, it was quickly apparent that the lithologies were not as the backroom expected and had communicated to the crew. When the outcrop wasn't as expected, the crew members instinctively switched to field characterization mode, taking significant time to characterize and map the outcrop. One crew member admitted that he "kind of lost track" of the sampling strategy as he focused on the basic outcrop characterization. This is the logical first step in a field geology campaign, that a significant amount of time must be spent by the crew and backroom to understand the outcrop and its significance. Basic field characterization of an outcrop is a focused activity that takes significant time and training [2, 3]. Sampling of representational lithologies can be added to this activity for little cost [4]. However, we have shown that identification of unusual or specific samples for laboratory study also takes significant time and knowledge. We suggest that sampling of this type be considered a separate activity from field characterization, and that crewmembers be trained in sampling needs for different kinds of studies (representative lithologies vs. specialized samples) to acquire a mindset for sampling similar to field mapping. Sampling activities should be given a significant amount of specifically allocated time in scheduling EVA activities; and in the better case, that sampling be done as a second activity to a previously studied outcrop where both crew and backroom are comfortable with its context and characteristics. Our hypothesis posited that crewmember knowledge of how the samples would be used upon return would aid them in choosing relevant samples. Our testing bore this hypothesis out to some extent. We therefore recommend that crewmember training should include exposure to the laboratory techniques and analyses that will be used on the samples to foster this knowledge. There is also the potential for increasing crewmember contextual knowledge real-time in the field through the introduction of in situ geochemical technologies such as field portable XRF. The presence of field portable geochemical technology could enable the astronauts to interrogate the samples for K abundance real-time, ensuring they could collect valuable and dateable samples [5]. Though simulations such as these can teach us a fair bit about decision making processes and timeline building, one EVA participant noted that when he wasn't collecting "real" samples, he wasn't at his best. This effect suggests that higher-fidelity studies involving truly remote participants conducting actual scientific studies merit further attention to capture lessons for application to future crew situations.
The NASA Design and Analysis of Rotorcraft (NDARC) software is an aircraft system analysis tool that supports both conceptual design efforts and technology impact assessments. The principal tasks are to design (or size) a rotorcraft to meet specified requirements, including vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) operation, and then analyze the performance of the aircraft for a set of conditions. For broad and lasting utility, it is important that the code have the capability to model general rotorcraft configurations, and estimate the performance and weights of advanced rotor concepts. The architecture of the NDARC code accommodates configuration exibility, a hierarchy of models, and ultimately multidisciplinary design, analysis, and optimization. Initially the software is implemented with low-fidelity models, typically appropriate for the conceptual design environment. An NDARC job consists of one or more cases, each case optionally performing design and analysis tasks. The design task involves sizing the rotorcraft to satisfy specified design conditions and missions. The analysis tasks can include off-design mission performance calculation, flight performance calculation for point operating conditions, and generation of subsystem or component performance maps. For analysis tasks, the aircraft description can come from the sizing task, from a previous case or a previous NDARC job, or be independently generated (typically the description of an existing aircraft). The aircraft consists of a set of components, including fuselage, rotors, wings, tails, and propulsion. For each component, attributes such as performance, drag, and weight can be calculated; and the aircraft attributes are obtained from the sum of the component attributes. Description and analysis of conventional rotorcraft configurations is facilitated, while retaining the capability to model novel and advanced concepts. Specific rotorcraft configurations considered are single-main-rotor and tail-rotor helicopter, tandem helicopter, coaxial helicopter, and tilt-rotor. The architecture of the code accommodates addition of new or higher-fidelity attribute models for a component, as well as addition of new components.
The NASA Design and Analysis of Rotorcraft (NDARC) software is an aircraft system analysis tool that supports both conceptual design efforts and technology impact assessments. The principal tasks are to design (or size) a rotorcraft to meet specified requirements, including vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) operation, and then analyze the performance of the aircraft for a set of conditions. For broad and lasting utility, it is important that the code have the capability to model general rotorcraft configurations, and estimate the performance and weights of advanced rotor concepts. The architecture of the NDARC code accommodates configuration flexibility, a hierarchy of models, and ultimately multidisciplinary design, analysis, and optimization. Initially the software is implemented with low-fidelity models, typically appropriate for the conceptual design environment. An NDARC job consists of one or more cases, each case optionally performing design and analysis tasks. The design task involves sizing the rotorcraft to satisfy specified design conditions and missions. The analysis tasks can include off-design mission performance calculation, flight performance calculation for point operating conditions, and generation of subsystem or component performance maps. For analysis tasks, the aircraft description can come from the sizing task, from a previous case or a previous NDARC job, or be independently generated (typically the description of an existing aircraft). The aircraft consists of a set of components, including fuselage, rotors, wings, tails, and propulsion. For each component, attributes such as performance, drag, and weight can be calculated; and the aircraft attributes are obtained from the sum of the component attributes. Description and analysis of conventional rotorcraft configurations is facilitated, while retaining the capability to model novel and advanced concepts. Specific rotorcraft configurations considered are single-main-rotor and tail-rotor helicopter, tandem helicopter, coaxial helicopter, and tiltrotor. The architecture of the code accommodates addition of new or higher-fidelity attribute models for a component, as well as addition of new components.
The NASA Design and Analysis of Rotorcraft (NDARC) software is an aircraft system analysis tool that supports both conceptual design efforts and technology impact assessments. The principal tasks are to design (or size) a rotorcraft to meet specified requirements, including vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) operation, and then analyze the performance of the aircraft for a set of conditions. For broad and lasting utility, it is important that the code have the capability to model general rotorcraft configurations, and estimate the performance and weights of advanced rotor concepts. The architecture of the NDARC code accommodates configuration flexibility, a hierarchy of models, and ultimately multidisciplinary design, analysis, and optimization. Initially the software is implemented with low-fidelity models, typically appropriate for the conceptual design environment. An NDARC job consists of one or more cases, each case optionally performing design and analysis tasks. The design task involves sizing the rotorcraft to satisfy specified design conditions and missions. The analysis tasks can include off-design mission performance calculation, flight performance calculation for point operating conditions, and generation of subsystem or component performance maps. For analysis tasks, the aircraft description can come from the sizing task, from a previous case or a previous NDARC job, or be independently generated (typically the description of an existing aircraft). The aircraft consists of a set of components, including fuselage, rotors, wings, tails, and propulsion. For each component, attributes such as performance, drag, and weight can be calculated; and the aircraft attributes are obtained from the sum of the component attributes. Description and analysis of conventional rotorcraft configurations is facilitated, while retaining the capability to model novel and advanced concepts. Specific rotorcraft configurations considered are single-main-rotor and tail-rotor helicopter, tandem helicopter, coaxial helicopter, and tiltrotor. The architecture of the code accommodates addition of new or higher-fidelity attribute models for a component, as well as addition of new components.
The NASA Design and Analysis of Rotorcraft (NDARC) software is an aircraft system analysis tool that supports both conceptual design efforts and technology impact assessments. The principal tasks are to design (or size) a rotorcraft to meet specified requirements, including vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) operation, and then analyze the performance of the aircraft for a set of conditions. For broad and lasting utility, it is important that the code have the capability to model general rotorcraft configurations, and estimate the performance and weights of advanced rotor concepts. The architecture of the NDARC code accommodates configuration flexibility, a hierarchy of models, and ultimately multidisciplinary design, analysis, and optimization. Initially the software is implemented with low-fidelity models, typically appropriate for the conceptual design environment. An NDARC job consists of one or more cases, each case optionally performing design and analysis tasks. The design task involves sizing the rotorcraft to satisfy specified design conditions and missions. The analysis tasks can include off-design mission performance calculation, flight performance calculation for point operating conditions, and generation of subsystem or component performance maps. For analysis tasks, the aircraft description can come from the sizing task, from a previous case or a previous NDARC job, or be independently generated (typically the description of an existing aircraft). The aircraft consists of a set of components, including fuselage, rotors, wings, tails, and propulsion. For each component, attributes such as performance, drag, and weight can be calculated; and the aircraft attributes are obtained from the sum of the component attributes. Description and analysis of conventional rotorcraft configurations is facilitated, while retaining the capability to model novel and advanced concepts. Specific rotorcraft configurations considered are single-main-rotor and tail-rotor helicopter, tandem helicopter, coaxial helicopter, and tiltrotor. The architecture of the code accommodates addition of new or higher-fidelity attribute models for a component, as well as addition of new components.
A novel approach for modeling the aero-propulsive characteristics of an electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft was developed and demonstrated in wind tunnel testing. The approach was applied to the NASA LA-8 tandem tilt-wing eVTOL aircraft, using an efficient, hybrid experiment design composed of a static I-optimal response surface design for slowly-varying test variables, and dynamic orthogonal phase-optimized multisine excitations for the control surfaces and electric propulsors. Both the static and dynamic experiment designs were executed simultaneously to collect informative data for model identification. Statistically-weighted multivariate orthogonal function modeling was used to combine local modeling results computed in the frequency domain using data collected with dynamic excitations operating on the control effectors to form an aggregate aero-propulsive model. The final identified model exhibited good predictive capability when compared to validation data acquired separately from the data used to develop the model. The required test time using these new techniques was reduced by at least a factor of five compared to previous static wind tunnel testing for the LA-8 aircraft, while providing more informative data, greater parameterization flexibility, and high-quality models.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.