Results for “critical design” — Page 4

NASA NTRS1979

Photovoltaic system criteria documents. Volume 4: Review criteria for photovoltaic applications

Guidelines are provided for the organization, preparation and conduct of program reviews for photovoltaic applications. These criteria apply to all photovoltaic applications. They include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) Conceptual design review; (2) Preliminary design review; (3) Critical design review; and (4) Operational readiness review. Contract goal's and objectives are met through program monitoring for cost, schedule, and performance for both managerial and technical elements for all PV applications activities.

Koenig, John C.↗

NASA NTRS2002

Thermal Conductivity and Sintering Behavior of Advanced Thermal Barrier Coatings

Advanced thermal barrier coatings, having significantly reduced long-term thermal conductivities, are being developed using an approach that emphasizes real-time monitoring of thermal conductivity under conditions that are engine-like in terms of temperatures and heat fluxes. This is in contrast to the traditional approach where coatings are initially optimized in terms of furnace and burner rig durability with subsequent measurement in the as-processed or furnace-sintered condition. The present work establishes a laser high-heat-flux test as the basis for evaluating advanced plasma-sprayed and physical vapor-deposited thermal barrier coatings under the NASA Ultra Efficient Engine Technology (UEET) Program. The candidate coating materials for this program are novel thermal barrier coatings that are found to have significantly reduced thermal conductivities due to an oxide-defect-cluster design. Critical issues for designing advanced low conductivity coatings with improved coating durability are also discussed.

Zhu, Dongming↗

NASA NTRS2004

Development of Advanced Low Conductivity Thermal Barrier Coatings

Advanced multi-component, low conductivity oxide thermal barrier coatings have been developed using an approach that emphasizes real-time monitoring of thermal conductivity under conditions that are engine-like in terms of temperatures and heat fluxes. This is in contrast to the traditional approach where coatings are initially optimized in terms of furnace and burner rig durability with subsequent measurement in the as-processed or furnace-sintered condition. The present work establishes a laser high-heat-flux test as the basis for evaluating advanced plasma-sprayed and electron beam-physical vapor deposited (EB-PVD) thermal barrier coatings under the NASA Ultra-Efficient Engine Technology (UEET) Program. The candidate coating materials for this program are novel thermal barrier coatings that are found to have significantly reduced thermal conductivities and improved thermal stability due to an oxide-defect-cluster design. Critical issues for designing advanced low conductivity coatings with improved coating durability are also discussed.

Zhu, Dong-Ming↗

NASA NTRS2003

A Study of Technical Engineering Peer Reviews at NASA

This report describes the state of practices of design reviews at NASA and research into what can be done to improve peer review practices. There are many types of reviews at NASA: required and not, formalized and informal, programmatic and technical. Standing project formal reviews such as the Preliminary Design Review and Critical Design Review are a required part of every project and mission development. However, the technical, engineering peer reviews that support teams' work on such projects are informal, some times ad hoc, and inconsistent across the organization. The goal of this work is to identify best practices and lessons learned from NASA's experience, supported by academic research and methodologies to ultimately improve the process. This research has determined that the organization, composition, scope, and approach of the reviews impact their success. Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) can identify key areas of concern before or in the reviews. Product definition tools like the Project Priority Matrix, engineering-focused Customer Value Chain Analysis (CVCA), and project or system-based Quality Function Deployment (QFD) help prioritize resources in reviews. The use of information technology and structured design methodologies can strengthen the engineering peer review process to help NASA work towards error-proofing the design process.

Chao, Lawrence P.↗

NASA NTRS2007

Human Factors in the Design of the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV)

NASA s Space Exploration vision for humans to venture to the moon and beyond provides interesting human factors opportunities and challenges. The Human Engineering group at NASA has been involved in the initial phases of development of the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), Orion. Getting involved at the ground level, Human Factors engineers are beginning to influence design; this involvement is expected to continue throughout the development lifecycle. The information presented here describes what has been done to date, what is currently going on, and what is expected in the future. During Phase 1, prior to the contract award to Lockheed Martin, the Human Engineering group was involved in generating requirements, conducting preliminary task analyses based on interviews with subject matter experts in all vehicle systems areas, and developing preliminary concepts of operations based on the task analysis results. In addition, some early evaluations to look at CEV net habitable volume were also conducted. The program is currently in Phase 2, which is broken down into design cycles, including System Readiness Review, Preliminary Design Review, and Critical Design Review. Currently, there are ongoing Human Engineering Technical Interchange Meetings being held with both NASA and Lockheed Martin in order to establish processes, desired products, and schedules. Multiple design trades and quick-look evaluations (e.g. display device layout and external window size) are also in progress. Future Human Engineering activities include requirement verification assessments and crew/stakeholder evaluations of increasing fidelity. During actual flights of the CEV, the Human Engineering group is expected to be involved in in-situ testing and lessons learned reporting, in order to benefit human space flight beyond the initial CEV program.

Whitmore, Mihriban↗

NASA NTRS2006

Control of Technology Transfer at JPL

Controlled Technology: 1) Design: preliminary or critical design data, schematics, technical flow charts, SNV code/diagnostics, logic flow diagrams, wirelist, ICDs, detailed specifications or requirements. 2) Development: constraints, computations, configurations, technical analyses, acceptance criteria, anomaly resolution, detailed test plans, detailed technical proposals. 3) Production: process or how-to: assemble, operated, repair, maintain, modify. 4) Manufacturing: technical instructions, specific parts, specific materials, specific qualities, specific processes, specific flow. 5) Operations: how-to operate, contingency or standard operating plans, Ops handbooks. 6) Repair: repair instructions, troubleshooting schemes, detailed schematics. 7) Test: specific procedures, data, analysis, detailed test plan and retest plans, detailed anomaly resolutions, detailed failure causes and corrective actions, troubleshooting, trended test data, flight readiness data. 8) Maintenance: maintenance schedules and plans, methods for regular upkeep, overhaul instructions. 9) Modification: modification instructions, upgrades kit parts, including software

Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL)↗

NASA NTRS2010

Ares I-X: First Step in a New Era of Exploration

Since 2005, NASA's Constellation Program has been designing, building, and testing the next generation of launch and space vehicles to carry humans beyond low-Earth orbit (LEO). On October 28, 2009, the Ares Projects successfully launched the first suborbital development flight test of the Ares I crew launch vehicle, Ares I-X, from Kennedy Space Center (KSC). Although the final Constellation Program architecture is under review, data and lessons obtained from Ares I-X can be applied to any launch vehicle. This presentation will discuss the mission background and future impacts of the flight. Ares I is designed to carry up to four astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS). It also can be used with the Ares V cargo launch vehicle for a variety of missions beyond LEO. The Ares I-X development flight test was conceived in 2006 to acquire early engineering, operations, and environment data during liftoff, ascent, and first stage recovery. Engineers are using the test flight data to improve the Ares I design before its critical design review the final review before manufacturing of the flight vehicle begins. The Ares I-X flight test vehicle incorporated a mix of flight and mockup hardware, reflecting a similar length and mass to the operational vehicle. It was powered by a four-segment SRB from the Space Shuttle inventory, and was modified to include a fifth, spacer segment that made the booster approximately the same size as the five-segment SRB. The Ares I-X flight closely approximated flight conditions the Ares I will experience through Mach 4.5, performing a first stage separation at an altitude of 125,000 feet and reaching a maximum dynamic pressure ("Max Q") of approximately 850 pounds per square foot. The Ares I-X Mission Management Office (MMO) was organized functionally to address all the major test elements, including: first stage, avionics, and roll control (Marshall Space Flight Center); upper stage simulator (Glenn Research Center); crew module/launch abort system simulator (Langley Research Center); and ground systems and operations (KSC). Interfaces between vehicle elements and vehicle-ground elements, as well as environment analyses were performed by a systems engineering and integration team at Langley. Experience and lessons learned from these integrated product teams area are already being integrated into the Ares Projects to support the next generation of exploration launch vehicles.

Davis, Stephan R.↗

NASA NTRS2006

Independent Space Operators: Gaining a Voice in Design for Operability

Affordable and sustainable space exploration remains an elusive goal. We explore the competitive advantages of evolving towards independent operators for space transportation in our economy. We consider the pros and cons of evolving business organizations that operate and maintain space transportation system assets independently from flight system manufacturers and from host spaceports. The case is made that a more competitive business climate for creating inherently operable, dependable, and supportable space transportation systems can evolve out of today's traditional vertical business model-a model within which the voice of the operator is often heard, but rarely acted upon during crucial design commitments and critical design processes. Thus new business models may be required, driven less by hardware consumption and more by space system utilization.

incentives↗

NASA NTRS2017

NASA's Space Launch System: Progress Report

After more than four decades exploring the space environment from low Earth orbit and developing long-duration spaceflight operational experience with the International Space Station (ISS), NASA is once again preparing to send explorers into deep space. Development, test and manufacturing is now underway on the launch vehicle, the crew spacecraft and the ground processing and launch facilities to support human and robotic missions to the moon, Mars and the outer solar system. The enabling launch vehicle for these ambitious new missions is the Space Launch System (SLS), managed by NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). Since the program began in 2011, the design has passed Critical Design Review, and extensive development, test and flight hardware has been produced by every major element of the SLS vehicle. Testing continues on engines, boosters, tanks and avionics. While the program has experienced engineering challenges typical of a new development, it continues to make steady progress toward the first SLS mission in roughly two years and a sustained cadence of missions thereafter. This paper will discuss these and other technical and SLS programmatic successes and challenges over the past year and provide a preview of work ahead before first flight.

Cook, Jerry↗

NASA NTRS2018

EoC Study Update to Examine the Cost, Schedule and Technical Changes to NASA Projects

The original National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Explanation of Change (EoC) study was conducted in 2010 to understand the underlying causes of cost and schedule growth. The first study consisted of 25 missions launched from 2000 to 2010 and looked at the events that led to growth. These events were categorized into different bins that were rolled up to quantify whether the growth was due to internal planning, or internal execution, or from external forces and found that the growth was evenly distributed among those three categories. The result of the study presented nine considerations focused at reducing growth due to project external events and internal planning events. Although no one 'magic bullet' consideration was discovered in the previous work, the nine considerations taken as a whole were postulated to help reduce cost and schedule change in future NASA missions. A recent update was conducted that included investigating 8 missions developed since the previous study to determine if the results were different. Cost, schedule, and mass increases were analyzed from the start of Phase B through Preliminary Design Review and Critical Design Review to Launch. As shown in this paper, the results are better with overall cost and schedule growth being reduced. The paper will show a comparison of the previous results to the updated results to show specific reductions and provide an explanation of which recommendations were followed.

growth↗

NASA NTRS2019

13kW Advanced Electric Propulsion Flight System Development and Qualification

The next phase of robotic and human deep space exploration missions requires high performance, high power solar electric propulsion systems for large-scale science missions and cargo transportation. Aerojet Rocketdyne's Advanced Electric Propulsion System (AEPS) program is completing development and qualification of a 13kW flight EP system to support NASA exploration. The first use of the AEPS is planned for the NASA Power & Propulsion Element, which is the first element of NASA's cis-lunar Gateway. The flight AEPS system includes a magnetically shielded long-life Hall thruster, power processing unit (PPU), and xenon flow controller (XFC). The Hall thruster, originally developed and demonstrated by NASA's Glenn Research Center and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, operates at input powers up to 13.3kW while providing a specific impulse over 2600s at an input voltage of 600V. The power processor is designed to accommodate an input voltage range of 95 to 140V, consistent with operation beyond the orbit of Mars. The integrated system is continuously throttleable between 3 and 13.3kW. The program has completed testing of the Technology Development Units and is progressing into the Engineering Development Unit test phase and the final design phase to Critical Design Review (CDR). This paper will present the high power AEPS system capabilities, overall program and design status and the latest test results for the 13kW flight system development as well as the plans for the development and qualification effort of the EP string.

in-space propulsion↗

NASA NTRS2019

13kW Advanced Electric Propulsion Flight System Development and Qualification

The next phase of robotic and human deep space exploration missions requires high performance, high power solar electric propulsion systems for large-scale science missions and cargo transportation. Aerojet Rocketdyne's Advanced Electric Propulsion System (AEPS) program is completing development and qualification of a 13kW flight EP system to support NASA exploration. The first use of the AEPS is planned for the NASA Power & Propulsion Element, which is the first element of NASA's cis-lunar Gateway. The flight AEPS system includes a magnetically shielded long-life Hall thruster, power processing unit (PPU), and xenon flow controller (XFC). The Hall thruster, originally developed and demonstrated by NASA's Glenn Research Center and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, operates at input powers up to 13.3kW while providing a specific impulse over 2600s at an input voltage of 600V. The power processor is designed to accommodate an input voltage range of 95 to 140V, consistent with operation beyond the orbit of Mars. The integrated system is continuously throttleable between 3 and 13.3kW. The program has completed testing of the Technology Development Units and is progressing into the Engineering Development Unit test phase and the final design phase to Critical Design Review (CDR). This paper will present the high power AEPS system capabilities, overall program and design status and the latest test results for the 13kW flight system development as well as the plans for the development and qualification effort of the EP string.

in-space propulsion↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Rapid Cycle Amine 4.0 System Development

Carbon dioxide (CO2) and humidity control is a key function of the spacesuit Portable Life Support Subsystem (PLSS). The latest spacesuit design utilizes a pressure swing bed containing a solid amine sorbent to scrub CO2 and humidity produced by the crewmember from the ventilation loop. The solid amine sorbent removes CO2 and humidity from the ventilation loop through a chemisorption mechanism. Simultaneously, CO2 and humidity are desorbed to vacuum via the two-bed pressure swing system during operation. This continuous regeneration allows for longer Extravehicular Activity (EVA) times while minimizing maintenance, consumables, and power usage. This concept has been in development for over 20 years, during which many prototypes and design iterations have been fabricated and evaluated. This paper discusses the recent Rapid Cycle Amine (RCA) design, development, and testing that has been done to advance the technology. The most recent fabrication is the RCA 3.0. It was delivered to NASA Johnson Space Center in 2015 and has since been tested at the component level and at the integrated PLSS level. The purpose of the component level testing was to understand CO2 removal capacity, end-of-life performance, and establish a baseline performance prior to integrated testing. The RCA 3.0 was integrated into the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) PLSS for a comprehensive Design Verification Test (DVT) series. The integrated testing provided the benefit of characterizing the impact performance degradation has on the system. Many of the RCA requirements were developed through analysis, based on the limitations of the PLSS and, in some cases, assumptions about the system and flow behavior. Integrated testing was an opportunity to validate those requirements and assumptions. While the RCA 3.0 was being tested, the next design iteration, RCA 4.0, was under development. The RCA 4.0 preliminary design phase began in late-2019 and shortly after the Preliminary Design Review, the critical design phase began in 2021. The design work has concluded with the completion of a Pre-Manufacturing Review in 2022. This paper provides an overview of the RCA 4.0 system design, summarizes the results of integrated RCA 3.0 testing, and discusses the pertinence of driving requirements such as mass, volume, and power consumption.

Kelsey Bloom↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s PACE Ocean Color Instrument Thermal Design Evolution: from Goddard’s Instrument Design Lab through Flight Development

NASA’s Plankton, Aerosol, Cloud, ocean Ecosystem (PACE) mission, set to launch in 2024, seeks to provide data continuity for the ocean color, aerosol and cloud measurements acquired by NASA’s on-orbit Earth Science observatories since the 1990s. It will accomplish this through its Ocean Color Instrument (OCI), an optical spectrometer being developed for hyper-spectral measurements in the ultraviolet-to-near-infrared band between 340 nm and 2260 nm. Although OCI’s instrument architecture will provide greater insight and resolution than its predecessors in this wavelength range, the engineering required to achieve this also poses a greater challenge. In thermal engineering, this translates to a more complex thermal control approach to address high heat dissipations, stringent stabilities, the volume of heat that requires transport, and changing thermal environments due to tilting of the entire instrument ±20° twice per orbit. This current work explores how the PACE OCI instrument design has evolved from its initial conception in NASA Goddard’s Instrument Design Laboratory (IDL) to the current iteration of its flight design. The IDL studies explored three separate instrument configurations and two spatial resolutions per configuration, which were then down selected to a single instrument type and spatial resolution for flight instrument development. OCI subsequently went through major project milestones, including Preliminary Design Review (PDR), Critical Design Review (CDR), Pre-Environmental Review (PER) and Pre-Ship Review (PSR), with significant design updates along the way. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive account of OCI’s thermal control architecture evolution and the engineering drivers that have shaped it, with the goal of identifying trends spanning the full instrument development timeline to inform and advance future instrument thermal designs.

PACE↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s PACE Ocean Color Instrument Thermal Design Evolution: from Goddard’s Instrument Design Lab through Flight Development

NASA’s Plankton, Aerosol, Cloud, ocean Ecosystem (PACE) mission, set to launch in 2024, seeks to provide data continuity for the ocean color, aerosol and cloud measurements acquired by NASA’s on-orbit Earth Science observatories since the 1990s. It will accomplish this through its Ocean Color Instrument (OCI), an optical spectrometer being developed for hyper-spectral measurements in the ultraviolet-to-near-infrared band between 340 nm and 2260 nm. Although OCI’s instrument architecture will provide greater insight and resolution than its predecessors in this wavelength range, the engineering required to achieve this also poses a greater challenge. In thermal engineering, this translates to a more complex thermal control approach to address high heat dissipations, stringent stabilities, the volume of heat that requires transport, and changing thermal environments due to tilting of the entire instrument ±20° twice per orbit. This current work explores how the PACE OCI instrument design has evolved from its initial conception in NASA Goddard’s Instrument Design Laboratory (IDL) to the current iteration of its flight design. The IDL studies explored three separate instrument configurations and two spatial resolutions per configuration, which were then down selected to a single instrument type and spatial resolution for flight instrument development. OCI subsequently went through major project milestones, including Preliminary Design Review (PDR), Critical Design Review (CDR), Pre-Environmental Review (PER) and Pre-Ship Review (PSR), with significant design updates along the way. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive account of OCI’s thermal control architecture evolution and the engineering drivers that have shaped it, with the goal of identifying trends spanning the full instrument development timeline to inform and advance future instrument thermal designs.

PACE↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Design and Hardware Progress on a Magnetically-Geared Actuator for Extremely Cold Lunar Environments

Introduction: Under the Motors for Dusty and Extremely Cold Environments (MDECE) Project, NASA Glenn Research Center is developing a magnetically-geared actuator for extremely cold space environments to avoid the wiring and significant efficiency penalty associated with heating grease-lubricated actuators as well as the stringent life and loading constraints imposed by dry film lubricated mechanical gears. The heating penalty can be equivalent to up to a 90% efficiency reduction in permanently shadowed regions on the Moon. This poster or presentation will summarize the progress made over the past 6-12 months on designing the fully-functional actuator and building a proof-of-concept actuator and testing it in an ambient environment. Design Progress: A critical design review was successfully completed at the end of June 2023. This presentation will touch on the key highlights from that review in the areas of electro-magnetic design and optimization, bearing optimization, thermal analysis, structural analysis, and mechanical design and manufacturing. The predicted technical performance measures of the actuator will be mentioned. The team is currently finishing some actions from the review and finalizing the drawing package in preparation for hardware procurement. Hardware Progress: Despite some significant delays in receiving fabricated parts and magnetic subassemblies, progress was made in manufacturing and assembling a proof-of-concept version of both the actuator’s magnetically-geared motor (Fig. 1) and the actuator’s cycloidal-type output magnetic gear stage (Fig. 2) [3]. The presentation will mention key lessons learned to date from the fabrication, assembly, and testing of the proof of concept.

Lunar surface↗

DOE OSTI2025

Laser system design and critical technologies for the NSF OPAL project

The three-year NSF OPAL project is completing the preliminary design of a 2 x 25-PW all-optical parametric chirped-pulse amplification (OPCPA) system capable of delivering 500-J, 20-fs pulses. The design includes two Alpha beamlines that can be co-timed and pointed into two experimental areas for high-intensity research in several configurations. Additionally, a more flexible 2-PW Beta beam can be used in place of one Alpha beam to allow a wider range of focusing geometries and synchronized electron-beam generation for diverse experimental applications. Here, building on the development of the mid-scale MTW-OPAL prototype system, the NSF OPAL project also focuses on advancing essential technologies, such as large-grating fabrication techniques and actively-cooled disk amplifiers.

42 ENGINEERING↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Gateway Program Safety and Mission Assurance Integration - the Future of Safe Deep Space Human Exploration

As a foundational element of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Artemis Campaign, the Gateway is an incrementally built cislunar spacecraft that will serve as a platform for deep space human exploration, science, and technology demonstration. The Gateway will be a unifying catalyst for international partners around the world to establish sustained deep space scientific investigations, lunar surface access, and missions to Mars. As human exploration moves farther away from Earth, spacecraft designs must prioritize and optimize mass and volume allocations, while minimizing human and spacecraft risk. To accomplish this objective, the Gateway Program Safety and Mission Assurance functions develop, implement, and ensure compliance with requirements, in concert with the accurate characterization and transparent communication of residual hazard risks, for integrated safety, reliability and maintainability and quality assurance. Safety and Mission Assurance was a key contributor during Gateway program pre-formulation and formulation activities where safety and reliability analysis was embedded in the Gateway Systems Engineering and Integration team. During these early program stages, a preliminary Gateway Integrated Hazard Analysis and Preliminary Gateway Probabilistic Risk Assessment assisted in Gateway architectural and operational definition as part of a risk-informed design process. As the deep space architecture has matured, the integrated Safety and Mission Assurance analyses have matured, new safety review processes have been developed, and requirements have been refined to ensure compliance with integrated safety and mission assurance objectives. The Gateway Program is currently concluding the preliminary design review informed milestone, where the primary objectives included: - Ensured completeness and consistency of the preliminary design, including the meeting of all requirements within appropriate margins and acceptable risk posture. - Identification of any major issues moving forward to the Critical Design phase. At this milestone, Safety and Mission Assurance provided numerous products, including Gateway Top Risks and Risk Mitigation Plans, updated integrated hazard analyses, updated probabilistic risk assessment, Crew Survival Analysis Report, and updated Safety and Mission Assurance Requirements and Plans. These products provide a many-faceted perspective on the inherent risk and available mitigations involved in flying the current proposed vehicle design and anticipated stack configurations. In addition, Safety and Mission Assurance identified top technical, process and workforce concerns to be addressed as the program progresses toward the critical design phase. This paper will detail the evolution of the Gateway Program Safety and Mission Assurance integration functions, provide its current status and lessons learned for future human spaceflight programs. Throughout this paper the key tenets of the Gateway Program Safety and Mission Assurance will be discussed: - Application of a risk-informed approach to identify and mitigate areas of highest risk. - Leverage of valuable processes and lessons learned from earlier spaceflight programs. - Development of Safety and Mission Assurance products to inform design risk trades. - Utilization of common Safety and Mission Assurance practices to identify safety risks for multiple perspectives: top-down, bottom-up, and across lines of integration. - Approval of safety hazards at the appropriate level of authority, keeping most deliberation closest to design expertise and elevating risks of greatest concern for program-level consideration. - Championing of Safety and Mission Assurance processes and forums to foster a pervasive safety culture that is transparent, inclusive, and collaborative between all partners. These tenets have allowed the Gateway Safety and Mission Assurance function to play a key role in optimized vehicle design evolution, and early identification and mitigation of Gateway program and Artemis mission risk.

Helen Vaccaro↗