Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “PANELS”

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 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1975

Annual report to the NASA Administrator by the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel. Part 2: Space shuttle program. Section 2: Summary of information developed in the Panel's fact-finding activities

The management areas and the individual elements of the shuttle system were investigated. The basic management or design approach including the most obvious limits or hazards that are significant to crew safety was reviewed. Shuttle program elements that were studied included the orbiter, the space shuttle main engine, the external tank project, solid rocket boosters, and the launch and landing elements.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1982

Imaging Science Panel. Multispectral Imaging Science Working Group joint meeting with Information Science Panel: Introduction

The state-of-the-art of multispectral sensing is reviewed and recommendations for future research and development are proposed. specifically, two generic sensor concepts were discussed. One is the multispectral pushbroom sensor utilizing linear array technology which operates in six spectral bands including two in the SWIR region and incorporates capabilities for stereo and crosstrack pointing. The second concept is the imaging spectrometer (IS) which incorporates a dispersive element and area arrays to provide both spectral and spatial information simultaneously. Other key technology areas included very large scale integration and the computer aided design of these devices.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1982

Information Science Panel joint meeting with Imaging Science Panel

Specific activity in information extraction science (taken to include data handling) is needed to: help identify the bounds of practical missions; identify potential data handling and analysis scenarios; identify the required enabling technology; and identify the requirements for a design data base to be used by the disciplines in determining potential parameters for future missions. It was defined that specific analysis topics were a function of the discipline involved, and therefore no attempt was made to define any specific analysis developments required. Rather, it was recognized that a number of generic data handling requirements exist whose solutions cannot be typically supported by the disciplines. The areas of concern were therefore defined as: data handling aspects of system design considerations; enabling technology for data handling, with specific attention to rectification and registration; and enabling technology for analysis. Within each of these areas, the following topics were addressed: state of the art (current status and contributing factors); critical issues; and recommendations for research and/or development.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2004

Improved Cryostat for Cooling a Wide Panel

An improved cryostat has been developed for cooling a wide panel evenly over its surface to a temperature of -423 F (approximately equal to -253 C) by use of liquid helium. Originally, the cryostat was to be used in measuring apparent strains in wide aluminum/lithium panels as functions of temperature in order to develop data for temperature compensation of the readings of strain gauges on a tank containing liquid hydrogen. Relative to the cryostat used previously for this purpose, the improved cryostat can be prepared for a test in less time, and it loses less helium during each test. Each wide panel to be tested is instrumented with thermocouples in preparation for a test. The previous cryostat was made of two aluminum halves that, for each test, were sandwiched together and sealed around the instrumented wide panel to be tested. The panel was thus enclosed in a plenum. The cryostat and adjacent panel areas protruding from the cryostat were then coated with a thermally insulating foam. During a test, liquid helium was made to flow into the plenum through a port on the bottom. The helium vaporized and expanded, filling the plenum with cold helium gas, which eventually flowed out of the plenum through a port on the top. The nature of the flow was such that a significant portion of the helium did not come into contact with the wide panel; hence, cooling was less efficient than it might otherwise have been. After completion of each test, the foam and the cryostat were separated from the panel. The cryostat was cleaned and prepared for installation on another instrumented wide panel for the next test. It took 28 hours to install the cryostat onto the instrumented panel, apply the foam, and perform ancillary operations in preparation for a test. The volume of liquid helium consumed during each test was 750 liters. The improved cryostat (see figure) includes an upper section and a lower section, both of which include permanent housings made of a thermally insulating foam 2-in. (approximately equal to 5-cm) thick. A liquid-helium- injection manifold is attached to the inside of the top section. The bottom section includes an outlet for helium gas. The manifold contains slots that, when the cryostat is installed on the panel, are located approximately 1 in. (approximately equal to 2.5 cm) from the wide panel. The array of slots spans a substantial portion of the area of the panel. The top and bottom sections of the cryostat are sealed to the panel by use of polytetrafluoroethylene cord and aluminum tape. Liquid helium is fed into the manifold from the top. The helium leaves the manifold through the slots and thus impinges directly on the panel. Hence, all the helium entering the cryostat must come into contact with the panel before leaving the cryostat. After a test, the cryostat is removed from the panel and reinstalled onto another panel for the next test. Installation of the cryostat on an instrumented panel takes a negligible amount of time, in comparison with the 28 hours associated with the previous cryostat. The amount of liquid helium consumed during a test in the improved cryostat is 500 liters - 250 liters less than before.

Clifton, W. B.↗
DOE OSTI2013

In-Situ Testing and Performance Assessment of a Redesigned WIPP Panel Closure - 13192

There are two primary regulatory requirements for Panel Closures at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), the nation's only deep geologic repository for defense related Transuranic (TRU) and Mixed TRU waste. The Federal requirement is through 40 CFR 191 and 194, promulgated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The state requirement is regulated through the authority of the Secretary of the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) under the New Mexico Hazardous Waste Act (HWA), New Mexico Statutes Annotated (NMSA) 1978, chap. 74-4-1 through 74-4-14, in accordance with the New Mexico Hazardous Waste Management Regulations (HWMR), 20.4.1 New Mexico Annotated Code (NMAC). The state regulations are implemented for the operational period of waste emplacement plus 30 years whereas the federal requirements are implemented from the operational period through 10,000 years. The 10,000 year federal requirement is related to the adequate representation of the panel closures in determining long-term performance of the repository. In Condition 1 of the Final Certification Rulemaking for 40 CFR Part 194, the EPA required a specific design for the panel closure system. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Carlsbad Field Office (CBFO) has requested, through the Planned Change Request (PCR) process, that the EPA modify Condition 1 via its rulemaking process. The DOE has also requested, through the Permit Modification Request (PMR) process, that the NMED modify the approved panel closure system specified in Permit Attachment G1. The WIPP facility is carved out of a bedded salt formation 655 meters below the surface of southeast New Mexico. Condition 1 of the Final Certification Rulemaking specifies that the waste panels be closed using Option D which is a combination of a Salado mass concrete (SMC) monolith and an isolation/explosion block wall. The Option D design was also accepted as the panel closure of choice by the NMED. After twelve years of waste handling operations and a greater understanding of the waste and the behavior of the underground salt formation, the DOE has established a revised panel closure design. This revised design meets both the short-term NMED Permit requirements for the operational period, and also the Federal requirements for long-term repository performance. This new design is simpler, easier to construct and has less of an adverse impact on waste disposal operations than the originally approved Option D design. The Panel Closure Redesign is based on: (1) the results of in-situ constructability testing performed to determine run-of-mine salt reconsolidation parameters and how the characteristics of the bedded salt formation affect these parameters and, (2) the results of air flow analysis of the new design to determine that the limit for the migration of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) will be met at the compliance point. Waste panel closures comprise a repository feature that has been represented in WIPP performance assessment (PA) since the original Compliance Certification Application of 1996. Panel closures are included in WIPP PA models principally because they are a part of the disposal system, not because they play a substantive role in inhibiting the release of radionuclides to the outside environment. The 1998 rulemaking that certified WIPP to receive transuranic waste placed conditions on the panel closure design to be implemented in the repository. The revised panel closure design, termed the Run-of-Mine (ROM) Panel Closure System (ROMPCS), is comprised of 30.48 meters of ROM salt with barriers at each end. The ROM salt is generated from ongoing mining operations at the WIPP and may be compacted and/or moistened as it is emplaced in a panel entry. The barriers consist of bulkheads, similar to those currently used in the panels as room closures. A WIPP performance assessment has been completed that incorporates the ROMPCS design into the representation of the repository, and compares repository performance to that achieved with the approved Option D design. Several key physical processes and rock mechanics principles are incorporated into the performance assessment. First, creep closure of the salt rock surrounding a panel entry results in consolidation of the ROM salt emplaced in the entry. Eventually, the ROM salt comprising the ROMPCS will approach a condition similar to intact salt. As the ROM salt reaches higher fractional densities during consolidation, back stress will be imposed on the surrounding rock mass leading to eventual healing of the disturbed rock zone above and below the panel closure. Healing of the disturbed rock zone above and below the ROMPCS reduces the porosity and permeability in those areas. Analysis of the new design demonstrates that: (1) the WIPP continues to meet regulatory compliance requirements when the ROMPCS design is implemented instead of Option D, and (2) there is no impact on the short-term effectiveness of the panel closure to limit the concentration of VOCs at the WIPP site boundary to a fraction of the health-based exposure limits (HBLs) during the operational period. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS1994

Accelerated panel methods using the fast multipole method

Panel methods are commonly used in computational fluid dynamics for the solution of potential flow problems. The methods are a numerical technique based on the surface distribution of singularity elements. The solution is the process of finding the strength of the singularity elements distributed over the body's surface. This process involves the solution of the matrix problem Pq = p' for a set of unknowns q. The Fast Multipole Method is used to directly compute q without using matrix solvers. The algorithm works in O(N) time for N points, a great improvement over standard matrix solvers. In panel methods, the surface of a body is divided into a series of quadrilateral panels. The methods involve the computation of the influence of all other panels on each individual panel. The influence is based on the surface distribution, though this can be approximated by the area for distant panels. An alternative approximation, though with arbitrary accuracy, is to develop a multipole expansion about the center of the panel to describe the effect of a given panel on distant points in space. The expansion is based on the moments of the panel, thus allow the use of various surface distributions without changing the basic algorithm, just the computation of the various moments. The expansions are then manipulated in a tree walk to develop Taylor series expansions about a point in space which describe the effect of all distant panels on any point within a volume of convergence. The effect of near panels then needs to be computed directly, but the effect of all distant panels can be computed by simply evaluating the resulting expansion. The Fast Multipole Method has been applied to panel methods for the solution of source and doublet distributions. A major feature of the algorithm is that the algorithm does not change to derive the potential and velocity for sources and doublets. The same expansions can be used for both sources and doublets. Since the velocity is related to the potential, and the doublet potential is related to the z-component of the source velocity, all values can be derived from the same expansion by taking a series of partial derivatives. This requires more expansion terms to be kept since terms are lost in the process of taking partial derivatives. Thus to maintain accuracy for the doublet computation, more terms are required than if just evaluating for sources. The resulting Fast Multipole code should then parallelize better than classical panel methods due to the locality of data dependencies found in the Fast Multipole Method. Theoretically the parallelized code should execute in O(log N) time with O(N) processors, though this is not practical. Ongoing work includes implementing the parallel accelerated panel method, including methods to improve the load balancing of the problem by taking advantage of the known geometry of panels, and to encorporate sensitivity analysis into the algorithm.

Leathrum, James F., Jr.↗