Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “protective structures”

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 559 records · Page 31
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1986

Development of composite tube protective coatings

Protective coatings for graphite/epoxy (Gr/Ep) tubular structures proposed for the Space Station are evaluated. The program was divided into four parts; System Definition, Coating Concept Selection and Evaluation, Scale-up and Assembly, and Reporting. System Definition involved defining the structural and environmental properties required of the Gr/Ep tubes. The prepreg and ply sequence selected was a P75S/934 (O2, + or - 20, O2)sub s layup which meets the various structural requirements of the Space Station. Coating Concept and Selection comprised the main emphasis of the effort. Concepts for protectively coating the Gr/Ep tubes included the use of metal foil and electroplating. The program results demonstrated that both phosphoric and chromic acid anodized Al foil provided adequate adhesion to the Gr/Ep tubes and stability of optical properties when subjected to atomic oxygen and thermal cycling representative of the LEO environment. SiO2/Al coatings sputtered onto Al foils also resulted in an excellent protective coating. The electroplated Ni possessed unacceptable adhesion loss to the Gr/Ep tubes during atomic oxygen testing. Scale-Up and Assembly involved fabricating and wrapping 8-ft-long by 2-in-diameter Gr/EP tubes with chromic acid anodized foil and delivering these tubes, along with representative Space Station erectable end fittings, to NASA LaRC.

Dursch, H.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Post flight system analysis of FRECOPA (AO 138)

The unexpected duration for the flight of the Long Duration Exposure Facility (LDEF) conducted CNES to create a special investigation group in order to analyze all the materials and systems which compose the French Cooperative Payload (FRECOPA) except the experiments especially prepared for the flight. The FRECOPA tray was on the trailing face (V-) of the LDEF and protected from the atomic oxygen flux during all the flight. However, the solar irradiation was very important with solar flux quite perpendicular to the experiment once an orbit. There was also a good vacuum environment. The objectives are to test the effects of the combined space environment on materials and components like: structure, thermal control coatings and blankets, electronic unit, motors, and mechanical fixtures. When the LDEF returned to Kennedy Space Center, a visual inspection showed the very good behavior of the materials used and it was noted that the three mechanisms to open and close the experiment canisters worked completely. Many impacts of micrometeoroids or space debris on the structure and on the thermal protections were observed. After FRECOPA was brought back to Toulouse, many tests were performed and include: working order tests, mechanical tests (tension), optical and electronic microscopy (SEM), surface analysis (ESCA, SIMS, RBS, AUGER, etc.), thermal analysis, pressure measurements, and gas analysis (outgassing tests). The results of these experiments are discussed.

Durin, Christian↗
NASA NTRS1984

An analytical study of reusable flight-weight cryogenic propellant tank designs

Thermostructural analyses of reusable flight-weight cryogenic tanks for a vertically launched space vehicle have been conducted. An analytical procedure was developed for sizing the tank structure, cryogenic insulation, and thermal protection system. Unstiffened, integrally-stiffened, and honeycomb core sandwich tank skins using aluminum or stainless steel materials were compared for their ability to meet design criteria at least weight. Cryogenic insulation systems were also evaluated, including closed-cell cryogenic foams and evacuated honeycomb core. The results indicate that a 400 F foam-insulated unstiffened-skin aluminum tank structure is the lightest structure for either LOX or LH2 tanks that meet the selected design criteria, but only two to four percent lighter than a stiffened aluminum tank.

Taylor, A. H.↗
NASA NTRS1983

Structural response of transport airplanes in crash situations

This report highlights the results of contractural studies of transport accident data undertaken in a joint research program sponsored by the FAA and NASA. From these accident data studies it was concluded that the greatest potential for improved transport crashworthiness is in the reduction of fire related fatalities. Accident data pertaining to fuselage integrity, main landing gear collapse, fuel tank rupture, wing breaks, tearing of tank lower surfaces, and engine pod scrubbing are discussed. In those accidents where the energy absorbing protective capability of the fuselage structure is expended and the airplane experiences major structural damage, trauma caused fatalities are also discussed. The dynamic performance of current seat/restraint systems are examined but it is concluded that the accident data does not adequately define the relationship between occupant response and the dynamic interaction with the seat, floor and fuselage structure.

Thomson, R. G.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Joint Test Report For Validation of Alternatives to Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) have similar missions and therefore similar facilities and structures in similar environments. The standard practice for protecting metallic substrates in atmospheric environments is the application of an applied coating system. The most common topcoats used in coating systems are polyurethanes that contain isocyanates. Isocyanates are classified as potential human carcinogens and are known to cause cancer in animals. The primary objective of this effort was to demonstrate and validate alternatives to aliphatic isocyanate polyurethanes resulting in one or more isocyanate-free coatings qualified for use at AFSPC and NASA installations participating in this project. This joint Test Report (JTR) documents the results of the laboratory and field testing as well as any test modifications made during the execution of the testing. The technical stakeholders agreed upon test procedure modifications documented in this document. This JTR is made available as a reference for future pollution prevention endeavors by other NASA centers, the Department of Defense and commercial users to minimize duplication of effort. All coating system candidates were tested using approved NASA and AFSPC standard coating systems as experimental controls. This study looked at eight alternative coating systems and two control coating systems and was divided into Phase I Screening Tests, Phase II Tests, and Field Testing. The Phase I Screening Tests were preliminary tests performed on all the selected candidate coating systems. Candidate coating systems that did not meet the acceptance criteria of the screening tests were eliminated from further testing. Phase I Screening Tests included: Ease of Application, Surface Appearance, Dry-To-Touch (Sanding), Accelerated Storage Stability, Pot Life (Viscosity), Cure Time (Solvent Rubs), Cleanability, Knife Test, Tensile (pull-off) Adhesion, and X-Cut Adhesion by Wet Tape After a review of the Phase I test results, four of the alternative coating systems showed substandard performance in relation to the Control Systems and were eliminated from the Phase II testing. Due to the interest of stakeholders and time constraints, however, all eight alternatives were subjected to the following Phase II tests, along with field testing at Stennis Space Center (SSC), Mississippi: Hypergol Compatibility, Liquid Oxygen Compatibility, 18-Month Marine Exposure (Gloss Retention, Color Retention, Blistering, Visual Corrosion, Creepage from Scribe, Heat Adhesion), and Field Exposure (6- and 12-month Evaluation for Coating Condition, Color Retention, Gloss Retention). The remaining four alternative coating systems determined to be the best viable alternatives were carried on to Phase II testing that included: Removability, Repairability, Abrasion Resistance, Gravelometer, Fungus Resistance, Accelerated Weathering, Mandrel Bend Flexibility, and Cyclic Corrosion Resistance. Of the systems that continued to Phase II, three (3) alternative coating systems meet the performance requirements as identified by stakeholders. Two (2) other systems, that were not included in Phase II testing, performed well enough on the 18-Month Marine Exposure, the primary requirement for NASA technical standard NASA-STD-5008, Protective Coating of Carbon Steel, Stainless Steel, and Aluminum on Launch Structures, Facilities, and Ground Support Equipment, that they were also considered to be successful candidates. In total, five (5) alternative coating systems were approved for inclusion in the NASA-STD- 5008 Qualified Products List (QPL). The standard is intended to provide a common framework for consistent practices across NASA and is often used by other entities. The standard's QPL does not connote endorsement of the products by NASA, but lists those products that have been tested and meet the requirements as specified.

Lewis, Pattie↗
NASA NTRS2007

Cost-Benefit Analysis for Alternatives to Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes

NASA and Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) have similar missions and therefore similar facilities and structures in similar environments. The standard practice for protecting metallic substrates in atmospheric environments is the application of an applied coating system. The most common topcoats used in coating systems are polyurethanes that contain isocyanates. Isocyanates are classified as potential human carcinogens and are known to cause cancer in animals. The primary objective of this effort was to demonstrate and validate alternatives to aliphatic isocyanate polyurethanes resulting in one or more isocyanate-free coatings qualified for use at AFSPC and NASA installations participating in this project. This Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) quantifies the estimated capital and process costs of coating alternatives and cost savings relative to the current coatings. The estimates in this CBA are to be used for assessing the relative merits of the selected alternatives. The actual economic effects at any specific facility will depend on the alternative material or technology implemented, the number of actual applications converted, future workloads, and other factors . The participants initially considered eighteen (18) alternative coatings as described in the Potential Alternatives Report entitled Potential Alternatives Report for Validation of Alternatives to Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes, prepared by ITB. Of those, 8 alternatives were selected for testing in accordance with the Joint Test Protocol entitled Joint Test Protocol for Validation of Alternatives to Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes, and the Field Test Plan entitled Field Evaluations Test Plan for Validation of Alternatives 10 Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes, both of which were prepared by ITB. A joint Test Report entitled Joint Test Report for Validation of Alternatives to Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes, prepared by ITB, documents the results of the laboratory and field testing, as well as any test modifications made during the execution of the testing. The coatings selected for evaluation in this CBA are shown in the table below. Only one control coating system is considered in this analysis. These coatings were either downselected for Phase II or performed well enough to be included in the Qualified Products List in the NASA technical standard NASA-STD-5008, Protective Coating of Carbon Steel, Stainless Steel, and Aluminum on Launch Structures, Facilities, and Ground Support Equipment.

Lewis, Pattie↗
DOE OSTI2020

DNA origami protection and molecular interfacing through engineered sequence-defined peptoids

DNA nanotechnology has established approaches for designing programmable and precisely controlled nanoscale architectures through specific Watson−Crick base-pairing, molecular plasticity, and intermolecular connectivity. In particular, superior control over DNA origami structures could be beneficial for biomedical applications, including biosensing, in vivo imaging, and drug and gene delivery. However, protecting DNA origami structures in complex biological fluids while preserving their structural characteristics remains a major challenge for enabling these applications. Here, we developed a class of structurally well-defined peptoids to protect DNA origamis in ionic and bioactive conditions and systematically explored the effects of peptoid architecture and sequence dependency on DNA origami stability. The applicability of this approach for drug delivery, bioimaging, and cell targeting was also demonstrated. A series of peptoids (PE1–9) with two types of architectures, termed as “brush” and “block,” were built from positively charged monomers and neutral oligo-ethyleneoxy monomers, where certain designs were found to greatly enhance the stability of DNA origami. Through experimental and molecular dynamics studies, we demonstrated the role of sequence-dependent electrostatic interactions of peptoids with the DNA backbone. We showed that octahedral DNA origamis coated with peptoid (PE2) can be used as carriers for anticancer drug and protein, where the peptoid modulated the rate of drug release and prolonged protein stability against proteolytic hydrolysis. Finally, we synthesized two alkyne-modified peptoids (PE8 and PE9), conjugated with fluorophore and antibody, to make stable DNA origamis with imaging and cell-targeting capabilities. Our results demonstrate an approach toward functional and physiologically stable DNA origami for biomedical applications.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
NASA NTRS2016

Manufacturing Challenges and Benefits when Scaling the HIAD Stacked-Torus Aeroshell to a 15m Class System

Over a decade of work has been conducted in the development of NASA's Hypersonic Inflatable Aerodynamic Decelerator (HIAD) deployable aeroshell technology. This effort has included multiple ground test campaigns and flight tests culminating in the HIAD project's second generation (Gen-2) aeroshell system. The HIAD project team has developed, fabricated, and tested stacked-torus inflatable structures (IS) with flexible thermal protection systems (F-TPS) ranging in diameters from 3-6m, with cone angles of 60 and 70 deg. To meet NASA and commercial near term objectives, the HIAD team must scale the current technology up to 12-15m in diameter. The HIAD project's experience in scaling the technology has reached a critical juncture. Growing from a 6m to a 15m class system will introduce many new structural and logistical challenges to an already complicated manufacturing process. Although the general architecture and key aspects of the HIAD design scale well to larger vehicles, details of the technology will need to be reevaluated and possibly redesigned for use in a 15m-class HIAD system. These include: layout and size of the structural webbing that transfers load throughout the IS, inflatable gas barrier design, torus diameter and braid construction, internal pressure and inflation line routing, adhesives used for coating and bonding, and F-TPS gore design and seam fabrication. The logistics of fabricating and testing the IS and the F-TPS also become more challenging with increased scale. Compared to the 6m aeroshell (the largest HIAD built to date), a 12m aeroshell has four times the cross-sectional area, and a 15m one has over six times the area. This means that fabrication and test procedures will need to be reexamined to account for the sheer size and weight of the aeroshell components. This will affect a variety of steps in the manufacturing process, such as: stacking the tori during assembly, stitching the structural webbing, initial inflation of tori, and stitching of F-TPS gores. Additionally, new approaches and hardware will be required for handling and ground testing of both individual tori and the fully assembled HIADs. There are also noteworthy benefits of scaling up the HIAD aeroshell to 15m-class system. Two complications in working with handmade textiles structures are the non-linearity of the materials and the role of human accuracy during fabrication. Larger, more capable, HIAD structures should see much larger operational loads, potentially bringing the structural response of the materials out of the non-linear regime and into the preferred linear response range. Also, making the reasonable assumption that the magnitude of fabrication accuracy remains constant as the structures grow, the relative effect of fabrication errors should decrease as a percentage of the textile component size. Combined, these two effects improve the predictive capability and the uniformity of the structural response for a 12-15m class HIAD. In this paper, the challenges and associated mitigation plans related to scaling up the HIAD stacked-torus aeroshell to a 15m class system will be discussed. In addition, the benefits of enlarging the structure will be further explored.

Decellerators↗
NASA NTRS2016

Manufacturing Challenges and Benefits when Scaling the HIAD Stacked-Torus Aeroshell to a 15m-Class System

Over a decade of work has been conducted in the development of NASAs Hypersonic Inflatable Aerodynamic Decelerator (HIAD) deployable aeroshell technology. This effort has included multiple ground test campaigns and flight tests culminating in the HIAD projects second generation (Gen-2) aeroshell system. The HIAD project team has developed, fabricated, and tested stacked-torus inflatable structures (IS) with flexible thermal protection systems (F-TPS) ranging in diameters from 3-6m, with cone angles of 60 and 70 deg. To meet NASA and commercial near term objectives, the HIAD team must scale the current technology up to 12-15m in diameter. Therefore, the HIAD projects experience in scaling the technology has reached a critical juncture. Growing from a 6m to a 15m-class system will introduce many new structural and logistical challenges to an already complicated manufacturing process.Although the general architecture and key aspects of the HIAD design scale well to larger vehicles, details of the technology will need to be reevaluated and possibly redesigned for use in a 15m-class HIAD system. These include: layout and size of the structural webbing that transfers load throughout the IS, inflatable gas barrier design, torus diameter and braid construction, internal pressure and inflation line routing, adhesives used for coating and bonding, and F-TPS gore design and seam fabrication. The logistics of fabricating and testing the IS and the F-TPS also become more challenging with increased scale. Compared to the 6m aeroshell (the largest HIAD built to date), a 12m aeroshell has four times the cross-sectional area, and a 15m one has over six times the area. This means that fabrication and test procedures will need to be reexamined to ac-count for the sheer size and weight of the aeroshell components. This will affect a variety of steps in the manufacturing process, such as: stacking the tori during assembly, stitching the structural webbing, initial inflation of tori, and stitching of F-TPS gores. Additionally, new approaches and hardware will be required for handling and ground testing of both individual tori and the fully assembled HIADs.There are also noteworthy benefits of scaling up the HIAD aeroshell to a 15m-class system. Two complications in working with handmade textile structures are the non-linearity of the material components and the role of human accuracy during fabrication. Larger, more capable, HIAD structures should see much larger operational loads, potentially bringing the structural response of the material components out of the non-linear regime and into the preferred linear response range. Also, making the reasonable assumption that the magnitude of fabrication accuracy remains constant as the structures grow, the relative effect of fabrication errors should decrease as a percentage of the textile component size. Combined, these two effects improve the predictive capability and the uniformity of the structural response for a 12-15m HIAD.In this presentation, a handful of the challenges and associated mitigation plans will be discussed, as well as an update on current 12m aeroshell manufacturing and testing that is addressing these challenges

Infatables↗
NASA NTRS2016

Manufacturing Challenges and Benefits When Scaling the HIAD Stacked-Torus Aeroshell to a 15 Meter Class System

Over a decade of work has been conducted in the development of NASA's Hypersonic Inflatable Aerodynamic Decelerator (HIAD) deployable aeroshell technology. This effort has included multiple ground test campaigns and flight tests culminating in the HIAD project's second generation (Gen-2) aeroshell system. The HIAD project team has developed, fabricated, and tested stacked-torus inflatable structures (IS) with flexible thermal protection systems (F-TPS) ranging in diameters from 3-6 meters, with cone angles of 60 and 70 degrees. To meet NASA and commercial near-term objectives, the HIAD team must scale the current technology up to 12-15 meters in diameter. Therefore, the HIAD project's experience in scaling the technology has reached a critical juncture. Growing from a 6-meter to a 15-meter class system will introduce many new structural and logistical challenges to an already complicated manufacturing process. Although the general architecture and key aspects of the HIAD design scale well to larger vehicles, details of the technology will need to be reevaluated and possibly redesigned for use in a 15-meter-class HIAD system. These include: layout and size of the structural webbing that transfers load throughout the IS, inflatable gas barrier design, torus diameter and braid construction, internal pressure and inflation line routing, adhesives used for coating and bonding, and F-TPS gore design and seam fabrication. The logistics of fabricating and testing the IS and the F-TPS also become more challenging with increased scale. Compared to the 6-meter aeroshell (the largest HIAD built to date), a 12-meter aeroshell has four times the cross-sectional area, and a 15-meter one has over six times the area. This means that fabrication and test procedures will need to be reexamined to account for the sheer size and weight of the aeroshell components. This will affect a variety of steps in the manufacturing process, such as: stacking the tori during assembly, stitching the structural webbing, initial inflation of tori, and stitching of F-TPS gores. Additionally, new approaches and hardware will be required for handling and ground testing of both individual tori and the fully assembled HIADs. There are also noteworthy benefits of scaling up the HIAD aeroshell to a 15m-class system. Two complications in working with handmade textile structures are the non-linearity of the material components and the role of human accuracy during fabrication. Larger, more capable, HIAD structures should see much larger operational loads, potentially bringing the structural response of the material components out of the non-linear regime and into the preferred linear response range. Also, making the reasonable assumption that the magnitude of fabrication accuracy remains constant as the structures grow, the relative effect of fabrication errors should decrease as a percentage of the textile component size. Combined, these two effects improve the predictive capability and the uniformity of the structural response for a 12-15-meter HIAD. In this presentation, a handful of the challenges and associated mitigation plans will be discussed, as well as an update on current manufacturing and testing that addressing these challenges.

Infatables↗
NASA NTRS2018

Design Optimisation and Mass Saving of the Structure of the Orion-MPCV European Service Module

This paper presents an overview of the design optimisation measures that have been proposed and analysed in order to reduce the mass of the structure, including the MMOD (Micro-Meteoroid and Orbital Debris) protection system, of the ESM (European Service Module) for the “Orion” MPCV (Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle). Under an agreement between NASA and ESA, the NASA Orion MPCV for human space exploration missions will be powered by a European Service Module, based on the design and experience of the ATV (Automated Transfer Vehicle). The development and qualification of the European Service Module is managed and implemented by ESA. The ESM prime contractor and system design responsible is Airbus Defence and Space. Thales Alenia Space Italia is responsible for the design and integration of the ESM Structure and MMOD protection system in addition to the Thermal Control System and the Consumable Storage System. The Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle is a pressurized, crewed spacecraft that transports up to four crew members from the Earth’s surface to a nearby destination or staging point. Orion then brings the crew members safely back to the Earth’s surface at the end of the mission. Orion provides all services necessary to support the crew members while on-board for short duration missions (up to 21 days) or until they are transferred to another orbiting habitat. The ESM supports the crew module from launch through separation prior to re-entry by providing: in-space propulsion capability for orbital transfer, attitude control, and high altitude ascent aborts; water and oxygen/nitrogen needed for a habitable environment; and electrical power generation. In addition, it maintains the temperature of the vehicle's systems and components and offers space for unpressurized cargo and scientific payloads. The ESM has been designed for the first 2 Lunar orbit missions, EM-1 (Exploration mission 1) is an un-crewed flight planned around mid-2020, and EM-2, the first crewed flight, is planned in 2022. At the time where the first ESM is about to be weighted, the predicted mass lies slightly above the initial requirement. For future builds, mass reduction of the Service Module has been considered necessary. This is being investigated, together with other design improvements, in order to consolidate the ESM design and increase possible future missions beyond the first two Orion MPCV missions. The mass saving study has introduced new optimised structural concepts, optimisation of the MMOD protection shields, and optimised redesign of parts for manufacturing through AM (Additive Manufacturing).

Micro-Meteroids and Orbital Debris Protection Syst↗
DOE OSTI2021

Structural Design Variations in Beetle Elytra

Abstract Beetles typically use their protective wing coverings or elytra to shield their membranous hindwings from the environment. Elytra in some terrestrial species have evolved a greater protective role capable of shielding the organism from powerful antagonistic predators. The structure–function relationships of these biological composites identify how architectural and chemical variations of the cuticle are tuned to create light‐weight, impact resistant composites. Specifically, the elytral structures of a tree dwelling beetle capable of flight, Trypoxylus dichotomus , and a terrestrial beetle incapable of flight, Phloeodes diabolicus , are compared to understand how their varied environmental needs forged the elytra to facilitate fight or resist fatal predator strikes. Mechanical and microstructural analysis reveals P . diabolicus has a harder, stiffer elytra that incorporate through‐thickness fibers to resist greater mechanical stresses imposed by bending and puncture. Conversely, the elytra of T . dichotomus have a compliant structure with large voids that facilitates localized deformation. Variations in flexural strength and puncture resistance remain attributed to P . diabolicus possessing a thicker cuticle with a greater degree of cross‐linking and an increased amount of endocuticular layers. These findings may provide useful insight into the design and manufacturing of composite materials for use in light‐weight or energy‐absorbing applications.

Rivera, Jesus↗
DOE OSTI2021

Control of Carbon Allocation in Phenylpropanoid Metabolism

Understanding the molecular mechanisms by which carbon flux is partitioned in plants, and how flux through the phenylpropanoid pathway in particular is regulated and allocated to different branches of the pathway is essential for the eventual rational manipulation of phenylpropanoid flux for bioenergy applications. The phenylpropanoid pathway is responsible for the biosynthesis of a diverse array of metabolites essential for structural integrity, water transport, UV protection, and defense against herbivores and pathogens. The products of the phenylpropanoid pathway, all of which are derived from phenylalanine, range from complex, insoluble polymers such as lignin and suberin, to soluble flavonoids and hydroxycinnamate esters, to volatile compounds used to attract pollinators. By far the most abundant of these is the complex heteropolymer lignin, which accounts for a significant portion of the dry weight of not only woody plants, but also of crop residues. Decreasing or altering lignin structure to provide increased cell wall digestibility could greatly increase the cost effectiveness of converting cell wall polysaccharides to ethanol or second-generation biofuels. On the other hand, it is also possible that plants engineered to accumulate higher levels of lignin could provide improved feedstock for direct combustion and electricity generation as part of a diverse bioenergy portfolio. Consistent with the enormous commitment of energy and carbon it requires, the synthesis of lignin is under tight regulatory control. In order to influence transcription, gene-specific activators and repressors must interact with basal transcription factors and the rest of the core transcriptional machinery. In eukaryotes, this interaction is bridged by the large, multi-subunit complex known as Mediator. Despite the clear importance of Mediator throughout the eukaryotes, the complex has only recently been studied in plants. We have shown that a pair of Mediator subunits, MED5a and MED5b are required for normal regulation of phenylpropanoid pathway product accumulation. Plants lacking these proteins show increased accumulation of phenylpropanoids in multiple tissues indicating that normally they directly or indirectly repress expression of phenylpropanoid pathway genes. Furthermore, we have recently shown that MED5 plays a role in dwarfing in some low lignin plants and feedback between and within metabolic pathways of secondary metabolism in Arabidopsis. Taken together with the established roles of Mediator in transcriptional regulation, and of MED5a and MED5b in the repression of phenylpropanoid metabolism, these observations suggest that MED5a and MED5b are key components of an active, transcriptional process by which phenylpropanoid homeostasis is maintained in wild-type plants. Our research focused on expanding our understanding of the role of Mediator, as well as elucidating the mechanisms by which these proteins influence phenylpropanoid biosynthesis and how metabolite accumulation within the pathway and between metabolic pathways is essential for feedback regulatory control. This research will inform future bioengineering efforts aimed at altering carbon allocation and cell wall engineering by contributing to our understanding of the role of Mediator in regulating lignin biosynthesis, a pathway of plant metabolism that is important on a global scale.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
NASA NTRS1990

Reusable structure for the Advanced Launch System

The U.S. Advanced Launch System (ALS) effort has been established to reduce the cost of payload mass to orbit and increase launch reliability. One approach to reducing costs of primarily expendable launch vehicles is to recover and reuse the most costly elements (i.e., the main engines and the avionics hardware); this is the mission of the propulsion/avionics (P/A) module. This study was conducted to identify material and design options for P/A module structure. A critical structural element is the aeroshell which: (1) provides the reentry aerodynamic surface, (2) shields other subcomponents from reentry heating, and (3) absorbs touchdown loads. Two P/A module types are required for the ALS: one that flies a high-temperature return from orbit profile and another that flies a cooler suborbital profile. For system cost benefits, common structure is desired for both types. A design concept is developed for a honeycomb sandwich structure that can survive the suborbital-reentry heating rates and the return-from-orbit heating rates with an ablative thermal protection system. Thermal analyses show that structural temperatures from aerodynamic heating are within material capabilities. Stress analyses indicate the structural design can support the critical loads.

Gibbins, Martin N.↗
NASA NTRS1959

Elevated-Temperature Tests Under Static and Aerodynamic Conditions on Honeycomb-Core Sandwich Panels

Stainless-steel honeycomb-core sandwich panels which differed primarily in skin thicknesses were tested at elevated temperatures under static and aerodynamic conditions. The results of these tests were evaluated to determine the insulating effectiveness and structural integrity of the panels. The static radiant-heating tests were performed in front of a quartz-tube radiant heater at panel skin temperatures up to 1,5000 F. The aerodynamic tests were made in a Mach 1.4 heated blowdown wind tunnel. The tunnel temperature was augmented by additional heat supplied by a radiant heater which raised the panel surface temperature above 8000 F during air flow. Static radiant-heating tests of 2 minutes duration showed that all the panels protected the load-carrying structure about equally well. Thin-skin panels showed an advantage for this short-time test over thick-skin panels from a standpoint of weight against insulation. Permanent inelastic strains in the form of local buckles over each cell of the honeycomb core caused an increase in surface roughness. During the aero- dynamic tests all of the panels survived with little or no damage, and panel flutter did not occur.

Groen, Joseph M.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Toward a Model-Based Approach for Flight System Fault Protection

Use SysML/UML to describe the physical structure of the system This part of the model would be shared with other teams - FS Systems Engineering, Planning & Execution, V&V, Operations, etc., in an integrated model-based engineering environment Use the UML Profile mechanism, defining Stereotypes to precisely express the concepts of the FP domain This extends the UML/SysML languages to contain our FP concepts Use UML/SysML, along with our profile, to capture FP concepts and relationships in the model Generate typical FP engineering products (the FMECA, Fault Tree, MRD, V&V Matrices)

fault protection↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Best Practices, Lessons Learned, and Examples on the Application of Damage Tolerance in Space Structures

Damage tolerance is an important consideration in space structures applications. The intent of damage tolerance is to demonstrate that the structure is robust to the presence of flaws over the service life of the space vehicle. Damage tolerance requirements in documents such as those in NASA, AIAA, and ISO can be challenging to implement. The intent of this paper is three-fold: (1) Provide best practices in the application of damage tolerance requirements for space applications, (2) Provide lessons learned for each of class of hardware, (3) Provide examples of challenging situations encountered in the application of damage tolerance. Examples cover additive manufacturing, composite overwrapped pressure vessels, pressurized structures, liquid rocket engines, thermal protection systems, and other classes of hardware. The philosophy and limitations of leak before burst and proof test logic are also discussed. Finally, a discussion on elastic-plastic fracture mechanics with comparisons to test data will be presented.

Best Practices↗
NASA NTRS1973

Space vehicle integrated thermal protection/structural/meteoroid protection system, volume 1

A program was conducted to determine the merit of a combined structure/thermal meteoroid protection system for a cryogenic vehicle propulsion module. Structural concepts were evaluated to identify least weight designs. Thermal analyses determined optimum tank arrangements and insulation materials. Meteoroid penetration experiments provided data for design of protection systems. Preliminary designs were made and compared on the basis of payload capability. Thermal performance tests demonstrated heat transfer rates typical for the selected design. Meteoroid impact tests verified the protection characteristics. A mockup was made to demonstrate protection system installation. The best design found combined multilayer insulation with a truss structure vehicle body. The multilayer served as the thermal/meteoroid protection system.

Bartlett, D. H.↗