SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Soft materials”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

545 records · Page 31

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2014

Robonaut 2 - IVA Experiments On-Board ISS and Development Towards EVA Capability

Robonaut 2 (R2) has completed its fixed base activities on-board the ISS and is scheduled to receive its climbing legs in early 2014. In its continuing line of firsts, the R2 torso finished up its on-orbit activities on its stanchion with the manipulation of space blanket materials and performed multiple tasks under teleoperation control by IVA astronauts. The successful completion of these two IVA experiments is a key step in Robonaut's progression towards an EVA capability. Integration with the legs and climbing inside the ISS will provide another important part of the experience that R2 will need prior to performing tasks on the outside of ISS. In support of these on-orbit activities, R2 has been traversing across handrails in simulated zero-g environments and working with EVA tools and equipment on the ground to determine manipulation strategies for an EVA Robonaut. R2 made significant advances in robotic manipulation of deformable materials in space while working with its softgoods task panel. This panel features quarter turn latches that secure a space blanket to the task panel structure. The space blanket covers two cloth cubes that are attached with Velcro to the structure. R2 was able to open and close the latches, pull back the blanket, and remove the cube underneath. R2 simulated cleaning up an EVA worksite as well, by replacing the cube and reattaching the blanket. In order to interact with the softgoods panel, R2 has both autonomously and with a human in the loop identified and localized these deformable objects. Using stereo color cameras, R2 identified characteristic elements on the softgoods panel then extracted the location and orientation of the object in its field of view using stereo disparity and kinematic transforms. R2 used both vision processing and supervisory control to successfully accomplish this important task. Teleoperation is a key capability for Robonaut's effectiveness as an EVA system. To build proficiency, crewmembers have attempted increasingly difficult tasks using R2 inside the Station. After donning motion capture equipment and a virtual reality visor, Expedition 34/35 flight engineer Tom Marshburn began operations with simple hand movements. Having gained confidence, Marshburn guided R2's arms in a leader-follower exercise with crewmate Chris Cassidy. He was also able to use the hand to grab a tumbling roll of tape, a task only demonstrable in microgravity. Later efforts saw Cassidy handle softgoods through shared control with ground operators, mimicking an activity previously achieved using only autonomy. Robotic climbing through the ISS on handrails requires both precision motion and compliant grasps in order to both position grippers on handrails/seat track and prevent large internal forces. R2 climbs using actively controlled compliance and torque limiting to meet both the precision and softness requirements. During a step, the attached leg is controlled to be strong and stiff in order to maintain precision trajectory tracking. The swing leg is controlled to be stiff but weak to minimize unintentional impact forces while maintaining precision. During a simulated dual limb grasp (as shown in Figure 1), the R2 controller maintains one limb rigid and one limb soft to prevent large internal forces from building up. R2's grippers also use a form of force control to limit grip force while not fully closed on either a handrail or seat track thus limiting unintentional forces on cables/objects that may be present in R2's translational path. The on-board torso R2 safety system relies on a single end-effector velocity limit to prevent potential impact forces from exceeding Station maximum load requirements. R2's mobile configuration required modifications to the velocity limiting safety function due to its large, dynamic inertia. R2's legs maneuver the robot's mass creating configuration dependent, joint-relative inertias. A single all-encompassing velocity limit to cover worst case inertia is prohibitively low. The upgraded R2 control and safety systems solve this problem using momentum limiting, momentum control, and kinetic energy minimization. Momentum and kinetic energy take the robot mass into account relieving low velocity restrictions on low inertia end-effectors while ensuring that the overall mass of R2 is limited from hazardous velocities. The momentum of R2's five safety nodes (each of the four end-effectors and the body) is monitored and compared to a single momentum limit. If any of the five nodes exceeds the safety limit, the motor power is removed and the robot comes to a stop. Momentum control/limiting also provides a simple, reliable method to integrate hand held tools into the safety system by providing the tool mass to the control system thus automatically reducing the allowable velocity of the end-effector with the tool. Work on the ground continues to build the skill set for an EVA Robonaut. Recent experiments (Figure 2) demonstrate how a teleoperator can use R2 to manipulate a tether hook, an important safety precaution on spacewalks. Another task displayed Robonaut's ability to pull back a protective jacket over a hose and search for damage, as well as inspect a quick-disconnect fitting for debris. Demonstrations such as these are indicative of EVA work done on ISS, specifically seen during a series of spacewalks over 2012 and 2013 where astronauts searched for an ammonia leak in one of the external cooling loops. Through experiments both on ISS and on the ground, R2 is evolving and providing the information needed to plan out the upgrades that will make an EVA Robonaut an effective tool. With the addition of legs, R2 will start climbing inside the space station and supply invaluable information on how the climbing strategies and task stabilization techniques must be refined. Ground R2 systems will continue to work with additional EVA tools and equipment in preparation for onboard IVA testing and future EVA applications.

Diftler, Myron↗

NASA NTRS2003

An Examination of Issues Related to a Europa Subsurface Component for the JIMO Mission

The Galileo Europa data set served to revolutionize our view of Europa. In particular the strong evidence of a large, cold, salty Ocean beneath 5-30 km of ice has profoundly altered the significance of Europa in our thinking, especially of context of habitability in the solar system. While much remains to be learned from spacecraft observations of several sorts, there are significant questions answerable only by in-situ techniques; these relate to the formation of Europa, the nature of its ocean, and the prospects for life in its ocean, sediments, and ice. We feel that wide-ranging discussion of an in-situ subsurface mission to Europa, as part of JIMO, should proceed. The science objective of the mission is to characterize the icy shell of Europa to resolve its provenance, estimate the composition of brine of the Europa ocean, and search for evidence of Earth-like life. Probably anyone would agree that an in-situ mission to Europa would be of great value, but he or she would also immediately take the position that such a mission is utterly impractical. We take the position here of defining the least complex mission that can nonetheless justify its cost and to argue that such a mission is realistic enough that it should be seriously considered. Our mission thinking has been: 1) Soft landing. A soft lander is required on a site sufficiently flat to offer a stable platform; no further site selectivity is required. 2) Subsurface exploration. The Europa subsurface must be examined. Surficial processes on Europa arguably have exposed the upper 200 m of shell to chemical effects from the Jovian radiation belts as well as cometary infall, etc; to examine native ice we must descend below that point to, for discussion, 300 m. At that depth we argue that the ice is characteristic of ice at depth and possibly is effectively sea ice. 3) Science data. A few simple measurements at various depths and at 300 m constitute a scientifically successful mission. Measurements would include analysis of meltwater for a few inorganic ions and amino acids and an optical examination of the borehole wall. 4) Communication. Transmission of data to an orbiter is essential, but we will constrain the landed mission to a daily communication over a few days. 5) Subsurface access. Drilling to 300 m is a significant challenge; it can be addressed by several means: Thermal Probe (Cryobot) which permits water to refreeze above the vehicle. This is our tentative choice with plutonium as the fuel to generate thermal energy for drilling and electrical power for operations. Open Hole Drill, a thermal system in which the meltwater is removed for greater thermal efficiency. Meltwater removal on Europa is both a complexity and a risk, but analysis is improved. Mechanical Drilling in which cutting or grinding generates ice chips which are removed. This is too complex at Europa temperatures. The measurement objectives for the mission will be: Obj. 1: Determine the concentration of simple inorganic salts in the Europa Ice Shell and, by extrapolation, of the ocean. These data will also validate spaceborne sensors. Obj. 2: Determine the nature and abundance of amino acids in the ice such that cometary infall material in the upper ice can be compared to material at depth. Obj. 3: Optically examine the ice to resolve inclusion structure, particulate content, and stratification. Access to 300 m depth is a significant if not audacious plan; we are aware that this has not been done on any planetary body. Our approach is the use of a plutonium heat source; to overcome Europa's surface temperature and to melt ice a significant amount of plutonium is needed, and significant shielding and other protective steps will be required. The quantity of plutonium is a key concern. The mission will require subsurface collection and processing of samples for in situ analysis, calling for a miniature, high pressure micro-sampling system designed to meet needs of instruments that require low presses for operation. The inlet system itself collects a micro-sample in the external high pressure environment, then transfers it into a protected low pressure environment for analysis.

Carsey, F. D.↗

NASA NTRS1967

Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1966

At the opening of the tenth year in the era of man’s mobility in outer space, we can look back on 1966 as offering convincing evidence that the United States had gained great competence. This evidence included: five orbital space flights by ten Gemini astronauts; four lunar missions undertaking the orbiting of and soft landing on the moon; numerous contributions to scientific knowledge by unmanned spacecraft and sounding rockets; and further demonstrations of the practical utility of operational space systems, including weather and communications satellites. During 1966, a record 100 American spacecraft were placed into earth orbit or on escape trajectories. Thousands of revealing and useful pictures of the earth were taken from space and of the moon from lunar orbit and on its surface. The Gemini program ended with rendezvous and docking experiments and extravehicular activity by the Gemini test pilots as the Apollo R&D test flights leading to the manned lunar mission came into the schedule. Thirty-five major scientific, technological, and operational milestones were cited for 1966 by the President in his Report to the Congress on aeronautical and space activities of the United States. This was one measure of the American commitment to share in the peaceful exploration of space for all mankind. Another was our support of the final steps toward a United Nations space treaty, undertaken to ensure that the peaceful exploitation of space had juridical basis in international law. Spectacular as some events in the space venture were in 1966, they nonetheless came to have diminished novelty in the eyes of many laymen. The multitude of both important and unspectacular space activities attained almost an accepted and routine place. This volume, as well as its predecessor chronicles, offers a ready reference on the major as well as the less-well known events. Beyond the welter of documented details on the complex nature of aeronautical and space related events and their impact, this volume helps to provide a better perspective upon today as we contemplate tomorrow. Such intent also serves future historians and analysts who cannot be unmindful of what is herein presented. When the Congress created the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in 1958, it charged NASA with the responsibility to “contribute materially to . . . the expansion of human knowledge of phenomena in the atmosphere and space’’ and to “provide for the widest practical and appropriate dissemination of information concerning its activities and results thereof.” NASA has attempted to do this and to include documentation for the historical record. The relating of NASA history begins with this day-by day chronicle and leads to more specialized studies and histories of the unprecedented task of extending man’s mobility and understanding beyond his planet. While a chronology cannot in itself serve as a full-fledged history, the size of this annual volume alone is illustrative of the scope and complexity of the historical task yet to be completed as memories fade and the records disappear.

SPACE PROBE↗

NASA NTRS2013

Non-Magnetic, Tough, Corrosion- and Wear-Resistant Knives From Bulk Metallic Glasses and Composites

Quality knives are typically fabricated from high-strength steel alloys. Depending on the application, there are different requirements for mechanical and physical properties that cause problems for steel alloys. For example, diver's knives are generally used in salt water, which causes rust in steel knives. Titanium diver's knives are a popular alternative due to their salt water corrosion resistance, but are too soft to maintain a sharp cutting edge. Steel knives are also magnetic, which is undesirable for military applications where the knives are used as a tactical tool for diffusing magnetic mines. Steel is also significantly denser than titanium (8 g/cu cm vs. 4.5 g/cu cm), which results in heavier knives for the same size. Steel is hard and wear-resistant, compared with titanium, and can keep a sharp edge during service. A major drawback of both steel and titanium knives is that they must be ground or machined into the final knife shape from a billet. Since most knives have a mirrored surface and a complex shape, manufacturing them is complex. It would be more desirable if the knife could be cast into a net or near-net shape in a single step. The solution to the deficiencies of titanium, steel, and ceramic knives is to fabricate them using bulk metallic glasses (or composites). These alloys can be cast into net or near-net shaped knives with a combination of properties that exceed both titanium and steel. A commercially viable BMG (bulk metallic glass) or composite knife is one that exhibits one or all of the following properties: It is based on titanium, has a self-sharpening edge, can retain an edge during service, is hard, is non-magnetic, is corrosion-resistant against a variety of corrosive environments, is tough (to allow for prying), can be cast into a net-shape with a mirror finish and a complex shape, has excellent wear resistance, and is low-density. These properties can be achieved in BMG and composites through alloy chemistry and processing. For each desired property for knife fabrication and performance, there is an alloy development strategy that optimizes behavior. Although BMG knives have been demonstrated as far back as 1995, they never found commercial success because they had to be ground (which presented problems because the alloys contained beryllium), they weren't low cost (because they weren't cast to a net-shape), they were brittle (because they were made with a low-quality commercial material), and they had extremely poor corrosion resistance (because corrosion was not well-understood in these materials). Ultimately, these shortcomings prevented the widespread commercialization. In the current work, the inventors have applied more than a decade of research on BMGs from Caltech and JPL to develop a better understanding of how to make BMG knives that exhibit an optimal combination of properties, processing and cost. Alloys have been developed based in titanium (and other metals), that exhibit high toughness, high hardness, excellent corrosion resistance, no ferromagnetism, edge-retaining selfsharpening, and the ability to be cast like a plastic using commercially available casting techniques (currently used by commercial companies such as Liquidmetal Technologies and Visser Precision Casting). The inventors argue that depending on the application (diving, military, tactical, utility, etc.) there is an optimal combination of design and alloy composition. Moreover, with new casting technologies not available at the inception of these materials, net-shaped knives can be cast into complex shapes that require no aftermarket forming, except for sharpening using water-cooled polishing wheel. These combinations of discoveries seek to make low-cost BMG knives commercially viable products that have no equal among metal or ceramic knives. Current work at JPL focuses on net-shape casting of these alloys and testing their mechanical properties versus commercially available knives to demonstrate their benefits.

Hoffman, Douglas C.↗

NASA NTRS2018

Development of an Inflatable Airlock for a Deep Space Gateway

Inflatable structures technology utilizes high-strength fabric materials and internal pressure to create a stiffened pressure vessel that can replace traditional metallic primary structure in a habitable spacecraft. The flexibility of fabric structures allows them to be compactly stowed for launch and expanded in space, providing significant launch volume savings. The unique construction and design flexibility of these structures can be customized for a variety of uses in space including landing bags, decelerators, long duration in-space and planetary surface habitats, and even airlocks. An airlock is often a required component of a crewed spacecraft to allow for maintenance and human exploration outside of the vehicle. Airlock designs in use today rely on complex hatches and seals connected by metallic walls. Recent developments towards the design of an inflatable airlock structure show feasibility and a significant launch volume savings over a traditional metallic design. This paper will provide a high-level summary of these projects and the current state-of-the-art in inflatable airlock development with additional references and detail about previous and on-going research, providing guidance for the design of a softgoods airlock system. The use of inflatables in space has been in development since the 1960’s for both habitats and airlocks. The first ever EVA was conducted by the USSR in 1965 using an inflatable airlock known as the Volga. This airlock was attached to the Voskhod 2 spacecraft and turned the vehicle into a dual chamber airlock. The airlock was successfully deployed, used and jettisoned after Alexey Leonov’s historic spacewalk. Additional work on human-rated inflatable structures was not continued until the late 1990’s when NASA-JSC led an effort to demonstrate these structures as feasible long-term pressurized elements with the TransHab project. The technology developed and pioneered during this project led to multiple patents and proven feasibility that inflatables could be used for large habitable structures. Following TransHab, Bigelow Aerospace continued the development of inflatable structures with technical support from NASA. This partnership eventually led to the successful flight certification, launch, attachment and deployment of the Bigelow Expandable Activities Module (BEAM) on the ISS in 2016. Inflatable and expandable airlock structures have undergone various detailed feasibility studies and testing for over 15 years, most notably with the Advanced Inflatable Airlock (AIA), Dual-Chamber Hybrid Inflatable Suitlock (DCIS), Minimalistic Advanced Soft Hatch (MASH), and Lightweight External Inflatable Airlock (LEIA). During this time, full-scale articles have been built and pressure-tested, and mock-ups and demonstrators have been constructed and evaluated. During the 2001-2003 timeframe, the AIA concept was matured through requirements development, conceptual design, subscale and full-scale engineering breadboards subjecting various test articles to deployment and pressure testing up to four times operating pressure. These tests proved the feasibility of successful deployment and structural integrity of an inflatable crewlock. Additional testing was performed in the ensuing years, as funding permitted, to further refine additional structural and deployment concepts and to understand the EVA crewmember interfaces, hatches and EVA support equipment interfaces that would be required for a fully functioning airlock. This work resulted in a refinement of the structural requirements and an accounting of the systems needed in an inflatable airlock. In 2014, the MASH project developed an ultra-lightweight airlock concept with a fabric hatch that utilized a unique pressure vessel shape to minimize structural loads around a linear seal. The concept uses an automated zipper-like seal that allows for crew egress/ingress. Most of the development work on the project thus far has focused on the design, analysis and testing of the primary structure and the zipper-like seal system is in the preliminary stages of development with a successful proof-of-concept test. As part of the 2017 LEIA effort, studies were conducted on EVA crewmember interfaces on the inside of an inflatable airlock. These efforts included the design of an internal secondary structure and placement of handholds and foot restraints to enable hatch opening, closing and translation through the airlock. Structural design, analysis and testing was completed on several secondary structure candidates. Crew interface testing was also completed using an inflatable crewlock mockup and the JSC Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) to simulate the movement of an EVA crewmember through an inflatable crewlock in microgravity. The results of these tests helped demonstrate the feasibility of utilizing an inflatable structure as an airlock and informed the required volume, hatch size, and configuration and location of translation aids for crewmembers in a microgravity crewlock. The ISS Quest airlock uses a dual-chamber design with isolated compartments known as the equipment-lock and the crewlock. The equipment-lock houses the Servicing, Performance and Checkout Equipment (SPCE) items (suit batteries, consumables, etc.) while the crewlock has limited internal hardware and is the nominally depressurized compartment during US EVAs. While inflatable dual chamber airlocks have been studied, the current state of the art emphasizes an inflatable crewlock-type structure attached to a rigid equipment-lock type or habitat structure. Since a large portion of the hardware in the equipment-lock are rigid components and connectors that are installed on the ground - and an inflatable structure does not achieve full structural capabilities until pressurized in space - a depressurized fabric structure cannot provide the capabilities of a full equipment-lock. The use of an inflatable as a crewlock, however, provides all the required capabilities for EVA operations in a small launch package that offers significant volume savings over a metallic crewlock. The functions of a traditional equipment lock, including the SPCE, could be provided by a spacecraft’s habitat module or node and not necessarily in a separate equipment lock. An inflatable crewlock would be attached to the vehicle and launched in a packed and compressed state, saving volume under the launch shroud and mass for the overall airlock element compared to a rigid crewlock. Work is currently underway to continue development of an inflatable airlock with a variety of focus areas including the consideration of crew-induced loads and interfaces, the design and development of an internal sub-structure to provide translation aids and restraints, the thermal considerations of a fabric shell depressurized during an EVA, the micrometeorite environment in deep space, and the packaging and deployment of an inflatable airlock.

Deep Space Exploration↗