Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “generalized predictive control”

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.

708 records · Page 40
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1994

A comparison between general circulation model simulations using two sea surface temperature datasets for January 1979

Simulations with the UCLA atmospheric general circulation model (AGCM) using two different global sea surface temperature (SST) datasets for January 1979 are compared. One of these datasets is based on Comprehensive Ocean-Atmosphere Data Set (COADS) (SSTs) at locations where there are ship reports, and climatology elsewhere; the other is derived from measurements by instruments onboard NOAA satellites. In the former dataset (COADS SST), data are concentrated along shipping routes in the Northern Hemisphere; in the latter dataset High Resolution Infrared Sounder (HIRS SST), data cover the global domain. Ensembles of five 30-day mean fields are obtained from integrations performed in the perpetual-January mode. The results are presented as anomalies, that is, departures of each ensemble mean from that produced in a control simulation with climatological SSTs. Large differences are found between the anomalies obtained using COADS and HIRS SSTs, even in the Northern Hemisphere where the datasets are most similar to each other. The internal variability of the circulation in the control simulation and the simulated atmospheric response to anomalous forcings appear to be linked in that the pattern of geopotential height anomalies obtained using COADS SSTs resembles the first empirical orthogonal function (EOF 1) in the control simulation. The corresponding pattern obtained using HIRS SSTs is substantially different and somewhat resembles EOF 2 in the sector from central North America to central Asia. To gain insight into the reasons for these results, three additional simulations are carried out with SST anomalies confined to regions where COADS SSTs are substantially warmer than HIRS SSTs. The regions correspond to warm pools in the northwest and northeast Pacific, and the northwest Atlantic. These warm pools tend to produce positive geopotential height anomalies in the northeastern part of the corresponding oceans. Both warm pools in the Pacific produce large-scale circulation anomalies with a pattern that resembles that obtained using COADS SSTs as well as EOF 1 of the control simulation; the warm pool in the Atlantic does not. These results suggest that the differences obtained with COADS SSTs and HIRS SSTs are mostly due to the differences in the datasets over the northern Pacific. There was a blocking episode near Greenland in late January 1979. Both simulations with warm SST anomalies over the northwest and northeast Pacific show a tendency toward increased incidence of North Atlantic blocking; the simulation with warm SST anomalies over the northwest Atlantic shows a tendency toward decreased incidence. These results suggest that features in both SST datasets that do not have a counterpart in the other dataset contribute signficantly to the differences between the simulated and observed fields. The results of this study imply that uncertainties in current SST distributions for the world oceans can be as important as the SST anomalies themselves in terms of their impact on the atmospheric circulation. Caution should be exercised, therefore, when linking anomalous circulation and SST patterns, especially in long-range prediction.

Ose, Tomoaki↗
NASA NTRS2005

Introduction to Flight Test Engineering [Introduction Aux Techniques Des Essais En Vol]

Flight test is at the core of what organizations must do in order to validate the operation and systems on an aircraft. While the AGARDograph series 300 and 160 series deal with aspects of this testing, this volume pulls it all together as an introduction to the process required to do effective flight test engineering. This volume was originally published in 1995. Its utility has been proven in that many flight test organizations and universities have requested copies for their engineers and students. It was felt that re-issuing it in a new format designed for electronic publication would be valuable to the community. This second printing changes none of the text, but rather reformats it. All the original references to AGARD (instead of RTO) are left in place so that none of the flavor of the original publication is lost. This is the Introductory Volume to the Flight Test Techniques Series. It is a general introduction to the various activities and aspects of Flight Test Engineering that must be considered when planning, conducting, and reporting a flight test program. Its main intent is to provide a broad overview to the novice engineer or to other people who have a need to interface with specialists within the flight test community. The first two Sections provide some insight into the question of why flight test and give a short history of flight test engineering. Sections 3 through 10 deal with the preparation for flight testing. They provide guidance on the preliminary factors that must be considered; the composition of the test team; the logistic support requirements; the instrumentation and data processing requirements; the flight test plan; the associated preliminary ground tests; and last, but by no means least, discuss safety aspects. Sections 11 through 27 describe the various types of flight tests that are usually conducted during the development and certification of a new or modified aircraft type. Each Section offers a brief introduction to the topic under consideration, and the nature and the objectives of the tests to be conducted. It lists the test instrumentation (and, where appropriate, other test equipment and facilities) required, describes the test maneuvers to be executed, and indicates the way in which the test data is selected, analyzed, and presented. The various activities that should take place between test flights are presented next. Items that are covered are: who to debrief; what type of reports to send where: types of data analysis required for next flight; review of test data to make a comparison to predicted data and some courses of action if there is not good agreement; and comments on selecting the next test flight. The activities that must take place upon completion of the test program are presented. The types of reports and briefings that should take place and a discussion of some of the uses of the flight test data are covered. A brief forecast is presented of where present trends may be leading.

Test facilities↗
NASA NTRS1994

Constraints on hydrothermal heat flux through the oceanic lithosphere from global heat flow

A significant discrepancy exists between the heat flow measured at the seafloor and the higher values predicted by thermal models of the cooling lithosphere. This discrepancy is generally interpreted as indicating that the upper oceanic crust is cooled significantly by hydrothermal circulation. The magnitude of this heat flow discrepancy is the primary datum used to estimate the volume of hydrothermal flow, and the variation in the discrepancy with lithospheric age is the primary constraint on how the hydrothermal flux is divided between near-ridge and off-ridge environments. The resulting estimates are important for investigation of both the thermal structure of the lithosphere and the chemistry of the oceans. We reevaluate the magnitude and age variation of the discrepancy using a global heat flow data set substantially larger than in earlier studies, and the GDHI (Global Depth and Heat Flow) model that better predicts the heat flow. We estimate that of the predicted global oceanic heat flux of 32 x 10(exp 12) W, 34% (11 x 10(exp 12) W) occurs by hydrothermal flow. Approximately 30% of the hydrothermal heat flux occurs in crust younger than 1 Ma, so the majority of this flux is off-ridge. These hydrothermal heat flux estimates are upper bounds, because heat flow measurements require sediment at the site and so are made preferentially at topographic lows, where heat flow may be depressed. Because the water temperature for the near-ridge flow exceeds that for the off-ridge flow, the near-ridge water flow will be even a smaller fraction of the total water flow. As a result, in estimating fluxes from geochemical data, use of the high water temperatures appropriate for the ridge axis may significantly overestimate the heat flux for an assumed water flux or underestimate the water flux for an assumed heat flux. Our data also permit improved estimates of the 'sealing' age, defined as the age where the observed heat flow approximately equals that predicted, suggesting that hydrothermal heat transfer has largely ceased. Although earlier studies suggested major differences in sealing ages for different ocean basins, we find that the sealing ages for the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian oceans are similar and consistent with the sealing age for the entire data set, 65 +/- 10 Ma. The previous inference of a young (approximately 20 Ma) sealing age for the Pacific appears to have biased downward several previous estimates of the global hydrothermal flux. The heat flow data also provide indirect evidence for the mechanism by which the hydrothermal heat flux becomes small, which has often been ascribed to isolation of the igneous crust from seawater due to the hydraulic conductivity of the intervening sediment. We find, however, that even the least sedimented sites show the systematic increase of the ratio of observed to predicted heat flow with age, although the more sedimented sites have a younger sealing age. Moreover, the heat flow discrepancy persists at heavily sedimented sites until approximately 50 Ma. It thus appears that approximately 100-200 m of sediment is neither necessary nor sufficient to stop hydrothermal heat transfer. We therefore conclude that the age of the crust is the primary control on the fraction of heat transported by hydrothermal flow and that sediment thickness has a lesser effect. This inference is consistent with models in which hydrothermal flow decreases with age due to reduced crustal porosity and hence permeability.

Stein, Carol A.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Modeling the Activity of Single Genes

The central dogma of molecular biology states that information is stored in DNA, transcribed to messenger RNA (mRNA) and then translated into proteins. This picture is significantly augmentated when we consider the action of certain proteins in regulating transcription. These transcription factors provide a feedback pathway by which genes can regulate one another's expression as mRNA and then as protein. To review: DNA, RNA and proteins have different functions. DNA is the molecular storehouse of genetic information. When cells divide, the DNA is replicated, so that each daughter cell maintains the same genetic information as the mother cell. RNA acts as a go-between from DNA to proteins. Only a single copy of DNA is present, but multiple copies of the same piece of RNA may be present, allowing cells to make huge amounts of protein. In eukaryotes (organisms with a nucleus), DNA is found in the nucleus only. RNA is copied in the nucleus then translocates(moves) outside the nucleus, where it is transcribed into proteins. Along the way, the RNA may be spliced, i.e., may have pieces cut out. RNA then attaches to ribosomes and is translated to proteins. Proteins are the machinery of the cell other than DNA and RNA, all the complex molecules of the cell are proteins. Proteins are specialized machines, each of which fulfills its own task, which may be transporting oxygen, catalyzing reactions, or responding to extracellular signals, just to name a few. One of the more interesting functions a protein may have is binding directly or indirectly to DNA to perform transcriptional regulation, thus forming a closed feedback loop of gene regulation. The structure of DNA and the central dogma were understood in the 50s; in the early 80s it became possible to make arbitrary modifications to DNA and use cellular machinery to transcribe and translate the resulting genes; more recently, genomes (i.e., the complete DNA sequence) of many organisms have been sequenced. This large-scale sequencing began with simple organisms, viruses and bacteria, progressed to eukaryotes such as yeast, and more recently (1998) progressed to a multi-cellular animal, the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. Sequencers have now moved on to the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster, whose sequence is slated for completion by the end of 1999. The human genome project is expected to determine the complete sequence of all 3 billion bases of human DNA within the next five years. In the wake of genome-scale sequencing, further instrumentation is being developed to assay gene expression and function on a comparably large scale. Much of the work in computational biology focuses on computational tools used in sequencing, finding genes that are related to a particular gene, finding which parts of the DNA code for proteins and which do not, understanding what proteins will be formed from a given length of DNA, predicting how the proteins will fold from a one-dimensional structure into a three dimensional structure, and so on. Much less computational work has been done regarding the function of proteins. One reason for this is that different proteins function very differently, and so work on protein function is very specific to certain classes of proteins. There are, for example, proteins such enzymes that catalyze various intracellular reactions, receptors that respond to extracellular signals and ion channels that regulate the flow of charged particles into and out of the cell. In this chapter, we will consider a particular class of proteins called transcription factors(TFs), which are responsible for regulating when a certain gene is expressed in a certain cell, which cells it is express in, and how much is expressed. Understanding these processes will involve developing a deeper understanding of transcription, translation, and the cellular processes that control those processes. All of these elements fall under the aegis of gene regulation or more narrowly transcriptional regulation. Some of the key questions in gene regulation are: What genes are expressed in a certain cell at a certain time? How does gene expression differ from cell to cell in a multicellular organism? Which proteins act as transcription factors, i.e., are important in regulating gene expression? From questions like these, we hope to understand which genes are important for various macroscopic processes. Nearly all of the cells of a multicellular organism contain the same DNA. Yet this same genetic information yields a large number of different cell types. The fundamental difference between a neuron and a liver cell, for example, is which genes are expressed. Thus understanding gene regulation is an important step in understanding development. Furthermore, understanding the usual genes that are expressed in cells may give important clues about various diseases. Some diseases, such as sickle cell anemia and cystic fibrosis, are caused by defects in single, non-regulatory genes; others, such as certain cancers, are caused when the cellular control circuitry malfunctions - an understanding of these diseases will involve pathways of multiple interacting gene products. There are numerous challenges in the area of understanding and modeling gene regulation. First and foremost, biologists would like to develop a deeper understanding of the processes involved, including which genes and families of genes are important, how they interact, etc. From a computation point of view, there has been embarrassingly little work done. In this chapter there are many areas in which we can phrase meaningful, non-trivial computational questions, but questions that have not been addressed. Some of these are purely computational (what is a good algorithm for dealing with a model of type X) and others are more mathematical (given a system with certain characteristics, what sort of model can one use? How does one find biochemical parameters from system-level behavior using as few experiments as possible?). In addition to biological and algorithmic problems, there is also the ever-present issue of theoretical biology - what general principles can be derived from these systems, what can one do with models other than just simulate time-courses, what can be deduced about a class of systems without knowing all the details? The fundamental challenge to computationalists and theorists is to add value to the biology - to use models, modeling techniques and algorithms to understand the biology in new ways.

Mjolsness, Eric↗
NASA NTRS2001

Automating Trend Analysis for Spacecraft Constellations

Spacecraft trend analysis is a vital mission operations function performed by satellite controllers and engineers, who perform detailed analyses of engineering telemetry data to diagnose subsystem faults and to detect trends that may potentially lead to degraded subsystem performance or failure in the future. It is this latter function that is of greatest importance, for careful trending can often predict or detect events that may lead to a spacecraft's entry into safe-hold. Early prediction and detection of such events could result in the avoidance of, or rapid return to service from, spacecraft safing, which not only results in reduced recovery costs but also in a higher overall level of service for the satellite system. Contemporary spacecraft trending activities are manually intensive and are primarily performed diagnostically after a fault occurs, rather than proactively to predict its occurrence. They also tend to rely on information systems and software that are oudated when compared to current technologies. When coupled with the fact that flight operations teams often have limited resources, proactive trending opportunities are limited, and detailed trend analysis is often reserved for critical responses to safe holds or other on-orbit events such as maneuvers. While the contemporary trend analysis approach has sufficed for current single-spacecraft operations, it will be unfeasible for NASA's planned and proposed space science constellations. Missions such as the Dynamics, Reconnection and Configuration Observatory (DRACO), for example, are planning to launch as many as 100 'nanospacecraft' to form a homogenous constellation. A simple extrapolation of resources and manpower based on single-spacecraft operations suggests that trending for such a large spacecraft fleet will be unmanageable, unwieldy, and cost-prohibitive. It is therefore imperative that an approach to automating the spacecraft trend analysis function be studied, developed, and applied to missions such as DRACO with the intent that mission operations costs be significantly reduced. The goal of the Constellation Spacecraft Trend Analysis Toolkit (CSTAT) project is to serve as the pathfinder for a fully automated trending system to support spacecraft constellations. The development approach to be taken is evolutionary. In the first year of the project, the intent is to significantly advance the state of the art in current trending systems through improved functionality and increased automation. In the second year, the intent is to add an expert system shell, likely through the adaptation of an existing commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) or government-off-the-shelf (GOTS) tool to implement some level of the trending intelligence that humans currently provide in manual operations. In the third year, the intent is to infuse the resulting technology into a near-term constellation or formation-flying mission to test it and gain experience in automated trending. The lessons learned from the real missions operations experience will then be used to improve the system, and to ultimately incorporate it into a fully autonomous, closed-loop mission operations system that is truly capable of supporting large constellations. In this paper, the process of automating trend analysis for spacecraft constellations will be addressed. First, the results of a survey on automation in spacecraft mission operations in general, and in trending systems in particular will be presented to provide an overview of the current state of the art. Next, a rule-based model for implementing intelligent spacecraft subsystem trending will be then presented, followed by a survey of existing COTS/GOTS tools that could be adapted for implementing such a model. The baseline design and architecture of the CSTAT system will be presented. Finally, some results obtained from initial software tests and demonstrations will be presented.

Davis, George↗
NASA NTRS2019

A Summary of NASA Rotary Wing Research: Circa 2008–2018

The general public may not know that the first “A” in NASA stands for Aeronautics. If they do know, they will very likely be surprised that in addition to airplanes, the “A” includes research in helicopters, tiltrotors, and other vehicles adorned with rotors. There is, arguably, no subsonic air vehicle more difficult to accurately analyze than a vehicle with lift-producing rotors. No wonder that NASA has conducted rotary wing research since the days of the NACA and has partnered, since 1965, with the U.S. Army in order to overcome some of the most challenging obstacles to understanding the behavior of these vehicles. Since 2006, NASA rotary wing research has been performed under several different project names [Gorton et al., 2015]: Subsonic Rotary Wing (SRW) (2006–2012), Rotary Wing (RW) (2012–2014), and Revolutionary Vertical Lift Technology (RVLT) (2014–present). In 2009, the SRW Project published a report that assessed the status of NASA rotorcraft research; in particular, the predictive capability of NASA rotorcraft tools was addressed for a number of technical disciplines. A brief history of NASA rotorcraft research through 2009 was also provided [Yamauchi and Young, 2009]. Gorton et al. [2015] describes the system studies during 2009–2011 that informed the SRW/RW/RVLT project investment prioritization and organization. The authors also provided the status of research in the RW Project in engines, drive systems, aeromechanics, and impact dynamics as related to structural dynamics of vertical lift vehicles. Since 2009, the focus of research has shifted from large civil VTOL transports, to environmentally clean aircraft, to electrified VTOL aircraft for the urban air mobility (UAM) market. The changing focus of rotorcraft research has been a reflection of the evolving strategic direction of the NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD). By 2014, the project had been renamed the Revolutionary Vertical Lift Technology Project. In response to the 2014 NASA Strategic Plan, ARMD developed six Strategic Thrusts. Strategic Thrust 3B was defined as the “Ultra-Efficient Commercial Vehicles—Vertical Lift Aircraft.” Hochstetler et al. [2017] uses Thrust 3B as an example for developing metrics usable by ARMD to measure the effectiveness of each of the Strategic Thrusts. The authors provide near-, mid-, and long-term outcomes for Thrust 3B with corresponding benefits and capabilities. The importance of VTOL research, especially with the rapidly expanding UAM market, eventually resulted in a new Strategic Thrust (to begin in 2020): Thrust 4—Safe, Quiet, and Affordable Vertical Lift Air Vehicles. The underlying rotary wing analysis tools used by NASA are still applicable to traditional rotorcraft and have been expanded in capability to accommodate the growing number of VTOL configurations designed for UAM. The top-level goal of the RVLT Project remains unchanged since 2006: Develop and validate tools, technologies and concepts to overcome key barriers for vertical lift vehicles. In 2019, NASA rotary wing/VTOL research has never been more important for supporting new aircraft and advancements in technology. 2 A decade is a reasonable interval to pause and take stock of progress and accomplishments. In 10 years, digital technology has propelled progress in computational efficiency by orders of magnitude and expanded capabilities in measurement techniques. The purpose of this report is to provide a compilation of the NASA rotary wing research from ~2008 to ~2018. Brief summaries of publications from NASA, NASA-funded, and NASA-supported research are provided in 12 chapters: Acoustics, Aeromechanics, Computational Fluid Dynamics (External Flow), Experimental Methods, Flight Dynamics and Control, Drive Systems, Engines, Crashworthiness, Icing, Structures and Materials, Conceptual Design and System Analysis, and Mars Helicopter. We hope this report serves as a useful reference for future NASA vertical lift researchers.

Yamauchi, Gloria K.↗