Results for “quantification” — Page 3

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

From Exploration Flight Test-1 to Artemis II--A NASA Langley's Orion Aerosciences Overview

The Orion Aerosciences program at NASA Langley has played a central role in advancing the aerodynamic and aeroheating prediction capabilities required for the Orion crew vehicle’s return from deep space. This presentation provides a technical overview of aerosciences contributions spanning Exploration Flight Test-1 (EFT-1), Artemis I, and the ongoing post-flight analysis of Artemis II. EFT-1 provided the first high-energy entry dataset for Orion, enabling critical validation of aerodynamic force and moment predictions, static and dynamic stability characteristics, and aeroheating environments at relevant flight Mach and Reynolds numbers. Flight-derived pressure data were used to refine the Flush Air Data System (FADS) methodology for atmospheric density reconstruction and to improve Best Estimated Trajectory (BET) solutions. The EFT-1 data also offered key insights into heat shield performance, including char layer recession, in-depth thermal response, and material retention behavior under flight conditions, informing updates to both thermal response models and uncertainty quantification practices. Building on EFT-1, Artemis I extended the database to true lunar-return conditions. Observations of heat shield performance, including localized char loss, bondline response, and recession variability, provided an unprecedented opportunity to reassess Thermal Protection System (TPS) and aeroheating modeling assumptions. Aerodynamic reconstruction efforts incorporated improved FADS calibration, enhanced atmospheric modeling, and refined force and moment databases to reduce trajectory and load uncertainties. Aeroheating comparisons between pre-flight predictions and flight data enabled targeted model updates, particularly in transitional flow environments and wake heating regions. For Artemis II, these lessons were systematically incorporated into the pre-flight prediction process. Updates included refined aerodynamic databases anchored to flight-validated corrections, improved density estimation and BET methodologies using enhanced database interpolation algorithm and FADS modeling, and revised aeroheating design environments informed by Artemis I material response observations. By the time of the workshop, Artemis II post-flight analysis will be underway, and preliminary findings will be presented where available, including early comparisons of aerodynamic reconstruction, atmospheric density estimation, and thermal protection system performance relative to updated predictions. Collectively, this body of work is a testament to the dedicated and multidisciplinary team whose sustained efforts have contributed to the program’s success and to the progressive maturation of Orion aerosciences modeling through numerical modeling, ground and flight data assimilation. The integrated advancement of aerodynamics, trajectory reconstruction, FADS-based density estimation, and aeroheating analysis has reduced predictive uncertainty and strengthened confidence for future crewed lunar and deep-space missions.

Orion↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Experimental and Numerical Investigation of the NASA High Efficiency Centrifugal Compressor Vaned Stage Geometry and Aerodynamic Performance

Since its inception in the early 2010s, the NASA High Efficiency Centrifugal Compressor (HECC) has been enigmatic for the propulsion research community: experimental data and numerical simulations of the stage have generally not aligned in their quantifications of performance metrics. Typically, the fault for these disagreements is assigned to the numerical simulations as the simulations are models, and models are inherently incomplete representations of the experiment. This “incompleteness” may manifest in assumptions regarding roughness or heat transfer, simplifications of the flow path (i.e., neglecting bleed flows), or the oft-scapegoated turbulence model. In the case of HECC, recent work showed unexpected discrepancies between the intended impeller geometry defined in the design report (termed Design-Intent) and the manufactured impeller used in the experimental campaigns (termed As-Manufactured). That work used numerical simulations to establish that the geometric differences between the Design-Intent and As-Manufactured impellers were significant enough to result in drastically different performance predictions for the HECC vaneless diffuser configuration. The Design-Intent impeller simulations over predicted the performance relative to the experiment, whereas the As-Manufactured simulations better represented the experimental data, both in terms of one-dimensional performance metrics and spanwise flow profiles. This effort expands on that work by examining in detail the geometry and aerodynamic performance of the HECC vaned diffuser configuration. Further differences between the Design-Intent and As-Manufactured geometries have been discovered in the vaned diffuser and exit guide vanes, and these differences are documented herein. The summations of the geometric differences for all of the components were used to create two numerical models of HECC vaned diffuser configuration: the Design-Intent simulations which are generated from the original geometry definitions given in the design report and the As-Manufactured simulations which are the best available representation of the manufactured compressor hardware used in the experimental test campaigns. In congruence with the earlier vaneless diffuser work, the numerical predictions of the Design-Intent choked mass flow rate, total pressure ratio, and efficiency were notably greater than that of the As-Manufactured simulations. To increase confidence in the experimental dataset, measurements from a recent test campaign conducted in 2024 are used to validate the original experimental data acquired from 2012 to 2014 with good repeatability overall, especially considering the passage of time and differences in the data acquisition systems between the test campaigns. Both numerical simulations were then extensively evaluated against the experimental data. The As-Manufactured simulations provided better estimates of the stage performance than the Design-Intent cases in terms of most performance metrics. Nonetheless, more detailed results still show opportunities for improvement. Despite a more accurate representation of the physical hardware, characterization of the impeller work input remains a challenge even for rigorously developed numerical models.

vaned diffuser↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Experimental and Numerical Investigation of the NASA High Efficiency Centrifugal Compressor Vaned Stage Geometry and Aerodynamic Performance

Since its inception in the early 2010s, the NASA High Efficiency Centrifugal Compressor (HECC) has been enigmatic for the propulsion research community: experimental data and numerical simulations of the stage have generally not aligned in their quantifications of performance metrics. Typically, the fault for these disagreements is assigned to the numerical simulations as the simulations are models, and models are inherently incomplete representations of the experiment. This “incompleteness” may manifest in assumptions regarding roughness or heat transfer, simplifications of the flow path (i.e., neglecting bleed flows), or the oft-scapegoated turbulence model. In the case of HECC, recent work showed unexpected discrepancies between the intended impeller geometry defined in the design report (termed Design-Intent) and the manufactured impeller used in the experimental campaigns (termed As-Manufactured). That work used numerical simulations to establish that the geometric differences between the Design-Intent and As-Manufactured impellers were significant enough to result in drastically different performance predictions for the HECC vaneless diffuser configuration. The Design-Intent impeller simulations over predicted the performance relative to the experiment, whereas the As-Manufactured simulations better represented the experimental data, both in terms of one-dimensional performance metrics and spanwise flow profiles. This effort expands on that work by examining in detail the geometry and aerodynamic performance of the HECC vaned diffuser configuration. Further differences between the Design-Intent and As-Manufactured geometries have been discovered in the vaned diffuser and exit guide vanes, and these differences are documented herein. The summations of the geometric differences for all of the components were used to create two numerical models of HECC vaned diffuser configuration: the Design-Intent simulations which are generated from the original geometry definitions given in the design report and the As-Manufactured simulations which are the best available representation of the manufactured compressor hardware used in the experimental test campaigns. In congruence with the earlier vaneless diffuser work, the numerical predictions of the Design-Intent choked mass flow rate, total pressure ratio, and efficiency were notably greater than that of the As-Manufactured simulations. To increase confidence in the experimental dataset, measurements from a recent test campaign conducted in 2024 are used to validate the original experimental data acquired from 2012 to 2014 with good repeatability overall, especially considering the passage of time and differences in the data acquisition systems between the test campaigns. Both numerical simulations were then extensively evaluated against the experimental data. The As-Manufactured simulations provided better estimates of the stage performance than the Design-Intent cases in terms of most performance metrics. Nonetheless, more detailed results still show opportunities for improvement. Despite a more accurate representation of the physical hardware, characterization of the impeller work input remains a challenge even for rigorously developed numerical models.

centrifugal compressor↗

DOE OSTI2021

AI-Batt (Autonomous Identification of Battery Life Models) [SWR 21-36]

Autonomous Identification of Battery Life Models (AI-Batt) AI-Batt is a MATLAB code base for developing lifetime models for batteries from accelerated aging data. The code base provides many functions for processing, visualizing, and modeling battery aging data, making the data processing, exploration, and modeling workflow substantially faster. These tools are tailored for working with battery aging data sets, which usually consist of many separate time-series for each cell, with many test conditions and possible replicates at each condition, which makes it difficult to simply process or visualize the data set. Complex modeling tasks, such as cross-validation, sensitivity analysis, and uncertainty quantification have been implemented to enable thorough statistical investigation of model predictions. Additionally, several machine-learning algorithms are implemented to autonomously identify suitable models via symbolic regression. Data processing functions automatically cast data from the struct data type, which is commonly used to store experimental data, but is not an acceptable input for most algorithms, to the table data type, which can be easily used as input to any optimization algorithm. Also, the data can be separated into time-invariant and time-variant data tables, which is helpful for exploring the data set as well as developing separate models for time-variant and time-invariant aging mechanisms. For example, in aging tests with constant temperature, temperature is a time-invariant experimental condition. Visualization tools enable plotting of data, model fits, and model simulations possible with single-line function calls, empowering data exploration of complex data sets with both time-varying and time-invariant trends. Plots can be automatically generated for the whole data set, or separated by data group (groups of test replicates) or individual data series. Data points or data series can be automatically colored by the value of a variable with a variety of color maps, and model predictions can also be colored by the value of a fit statistic. Comparisons between data sets and the predictions/simulations of different models on the same data set can be easily plotted as well. Distributions of parameter values from bootstrap resampling can be plotted to visualize the reliability of parameter estimation, or determine any correlations between parameters. Modeling tools handle the complex task of creating and parsing symbolic equations for modeling battery lifetime. Equations are parsed to grab relevant data variables, parameter values, or specified sub-models for input into optimization, evaluation, or simulation functions. Models can be optimized locally (one set of parameters for each data series), bi-level (some parameters shared across the data set), or globally (single set of parameters for all data). Functions implementing symbolic regression algorithms help users to discover effective model equations, even in poorly sampled, high-dimensional data.

Smith, Kandler [National Renewable Energy Lab. (NR↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Trajectory Engineering with Modular Patched Conics for Entry Systems and TPS (TEMPEST)

Brief Presenter Biography (35 word limit): Bohdan Wesely is an Aerospace Engineer in the Entry Systems and Technology Division at Ames. He has worked on a variety of projects for NASA including integrated TPS (thermal protection system) flight hardware deliveries and testing services for commercial partners. Introduction: TEMPEST is a new trajectory analysis framework that is designed to fill the gap between dedicated flight mechanics tools and aerothermal and TPS sizing tools. The project started as an SJSU master’s thesis and has since evolved into a general conceptual design tool capable of studying a wide variety of entry problems. Development is ongoing in the Entry Systems and Technology Division at NASA ARC. Why TEMPEST: Space missions involving entry into a planetary atmosphere involve a series of unique requirements across multiple disciplines. Whether it is traditional entry descent and landing (EDL), or aerocapture, the vehicle must navigate to its target landing location or orbit state, and the TPS must protect the payload during entry. The design process typically involves iterative handoffs between various flight mechanics, flow solver, and material response level tools. During the early conceptual phase, a wide variety of feasible trajectories are simulated in a Monte Carlo scenario which broadly satisfy the mission or landing requirements. Next, computational fluid dynamics (CFD), direct simulation Monte Carlo (DSMC), and other flow solver analyses are performed at various key trajectory points to generate an aero-database, heating and TPS design requirements also emerge at this stage. At this point, with updated aerodynamics from the various flow solvers, trajectories can be re-run, this in turn can change the required freestream conditions for the CFD tools, and as a project progresses, these analyses converge, and uncertainty is reduced. However, there is always a “hand-off” occurring between two inherently coupled phenomena. Analysis Description: One of the goals with TEMPEST is to use a variety of first principles estimation methods coupled with an atmosphere model to predict vehicle aerothermodynamics across the entire flight regime while propagating a 3 or 6 degree of freedom (DoF) trajectory. Aerodynamics methods include modified Newtonian, Maxwell and Cercignani- Lampis-Lord (CLL) for continuum, transitional, and free molecular flow regimes. Aerothermodynamics include boundary layer and reference enthalpy methods, and Mutation++ for non-equilibrium chemistry modeling. TEMPEST is also capable of stitching multiple trajectory segments together to study mission scenarios like multi-pass aerocapture and aero-gravity assists. Most of the program is implemented in MATLAB using modern system objects, it relies on several C++ shared libraries for supporting tools like Gmsh, the Global Reference Atmospheric Model (GRAM), and Mutation++. The various first principles aerothermal estimation methods are discretized across either a structured axisymmetric panel mesh or an unstructured tri-mesh generated from an open-source tool such as Gmsh, this allows solutions on the same mesh to be compared across tools such as CB-Aero. CFD Coupling. A physics-aware, gaussian process CFD anchoring scheme is proposed to adjust the various first principles methods as a CFD database is populated. One goal for this anchoring module is to inform the project where CFD should be run. Full knowledge of the entire trajectory, atmosphere, and aerothermodynamics allows for easier identification of high sensitivity areas and uncertainty quantification. While the first principles effects are well known and proven accurate in existing tools such as CB- Aero and Cart3D, a physics aware CFD anchoring scheme increases tool credibility across a project lifecycle. Material Response Modeling. Correct TPS sizing is critical for optimizing mass for science payloads and ensuring mission success. The process typically involves a thermal analysis along the trajectory with surface heating environments as a boundary condition. Several design constraints are maximum bondline temperature and maximum recession with various margining techniques. The material response tool FIAT, developed out of NASA Ames, is currently being integrated into the TEMPEST environment. TPS recession, shape change, mass loss, and mass property alteration are all factors that can perturb an entry trajectory. For missions like Mars 2020, recession was minimal and was safely handled separately as a post process. For missions such as Jupiter Galileo with a high TPS mass fraction or asteroid entries, recession plays a major role. The proposed fully coupled scheme is to use an epoch-based approach where the trajectory integration is halted after a recession threshold, the energy balance and FIAT are solved at each panel, the mesh, aerodynamics, and mass properties are updated, and the trajectory continues. Several computational tradeoffs have been made during the development of TEMPEST to limit the cost of a single trajectory and preserve its utility as a conceptual, rapid iteration tool. Conclusion: Development of TEMPEST is ongoing and the project is still in its infancy. This talk aims to showcase its unique capabilities to support future NASA entry systems missions.

Bohdan O Wesely↗