SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Design”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 739 records · Page 41

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2018

SLS Navigation Model-Based Design Approach

The SLS Program chose to implement a Model-based Design and Model-based Requirements approach for managing component design information and system requirements. This approach differs from previous large-scale design efforts at Marshall Space Flight Center where design documentation alone conveyed information required for vehicle design and analysis and where extensive requirements sets were used to scope and constrain the design. The SLS Navigation Team has been responsible for the Program-controlled Design Math Models (DMMs) which describe and represent the performance of the Inertial Navigation System (INS) and the Rate Gyro Assemblies (RGAs) used by Guidance, Navigation, and Controls (GN&C). The SLS Navigation Team is also responsible for the navigation algorithms. The navigation algorithms are delivered for implementation on the flight hardware as a DMM. For the SLS Block 1-B design, the additional GPS Receiver hardware is managed as a DMM at the vehicle design level. This paper provides a discussion of the processes and methods used to engineer, design, and coordinate engineering trades and performance assessments using SLS practices as applied to the GN&C system, with a particular focus on the Navigation components. These include composing system requirements, requirements verification, model development, model verification and validation, and modeling and analysis approaches. The Model-based Design and Requirements approach does not reduce the effort associated with the design process versus previous processes used at Marshall Space Flight Center. Instead, the approach takes advantage of overlap between the requirements development and management process, and the design and analysis process by efficiently combining the control (i.e. the requirement) and the design mechanisms. The design mechanism is the representation of the component behavior and performance in design and analysis tools. The focus in the early design process shifts from the development and management of design requirements to the development of usable models, model requirements, and model verification and validation efforts. The models themselves are represented in C/C++ code and accompanying data files. Under the idealized process, potential ambiguity in specification is reduced because the model must be implementable versus a requirement which is not necessarily subject to this constraint. Further, the models are shown to emulate the hardware during validation. For models developed by the Navigation Team, a common interface/standalone environment was developed. The common environment allows for easy implementation in design and analysis tools. Mechanisms such as unit test cases ensure implementation as the developer intended. The model verification and validation process provides a very high level of component design insight. The origin and implementation of the SLS variant of Model-based Design is described from the perspective of the SLS Navigation Team. The format of the models and the requirements are described. The Model-based Design approach has many benefits but is not without potential complications. Key lessons learned associated with the implementation of the Model Based Design approach and process from infancy to verification and certification are discussed

Oliver, T. Emerson↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Electric Sail Design Sensitivities

Electric Sails (E-Sails) are a promising propulsion technology that seek to enable high characteristic propellentless acceleration for spacecraft to reach distant and/or difficult to reach orbits such as rapid transit to heliopause. The E-Sail system exchanges momentum by using positively charged electrostatic tethers to repel solar wind photons to push it through space. This concept was first theorized by Pekka Janhunen in 2004 with further developments occurring including a NASA Innovative Advanced Concepts Phase 1 and Phase 2 hosted out of NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). These developments led to further maturation of the overall system, and this paper is designed to help identify different design sensitivities of an integrated Electric Sail system. To approach this, a small team at MSFC took an in-house developed three degrees of freedom (3DoF) simulation tool and a trajectory modelling tool to look at different design parameters and to determine a potential ideal E-Sail configuration. An E-Sail system has different design architectures including a barbell design, hub and spoke design, and a potential hybrid solution. The barbell design features two equally massed satellites that spin around a central point in the tether system. The hub and spoke design features a large central spacecraft with small end spacecraft to aid in formation control of the overall E-Sail system. Leveraging elements from both the hub and spoke, and barbell design, a hybrid option exists where one could have a larger central mass and one or two tethers extended to a smaller end mass [2]. In summary, the hub and spoke design is the ideal configuration for E-Sail with tethers spanning kilometers to achieve the designed design characteristic acceleration of at least one mm/s2 with this architecture being the focus of this study. Different key design parameters were varied as part of this study. These parameters include the total number of tethers, the length of the tethers, spin rate, relative spacecraft mass, tether voltage, inertia per tether, and impact of slew rate changes. These results started from an internal MSFC technology demonstration mission design and then the parameters were varied with engineering judgement to ensure that the results were consistent with expected results. These were varied in the MSFC 3DoF tool and compared to baseline results to generate a candidate ideal E-Sail design system. These results were then used to help inform the mission analysis design for the system. The 3DoF trajectory optimization was performed in the Astrodynamics and Space Science Enabling Toolbox (ASSET) and utilized collocation optimization of control vector pointing with the objective function being transfer duration. A representative model of the E-Sail force was derived as a function of the Sun-pointing vector direction. This model was initialized with a zero Sun Incidence Angle (SIA) trajectory for the initial guess generation, then with a portion of the mission optimized SIA time history for fast outbound transfers. After the trajectory is hyperbolic relative to a heliocentric frame, the SIA is maintained at 0 degrees except for any needed trajectory correction maneuvers. This trajectory optimization looked at different characteristic acceleration values to analyze the impact it had on mission performance. As a result of this study, the team can best inform mission designers and technology development efforts to mature the E-Sail system. This study will allow mission designers to have defined rules-of-thumb to design an E-Sail system to meet desired mission needs as well as providing several sample mission profiles. These design drivers will inform maturation efforts on which design requirements to consider for an integrated E-Sail design.

E-Sail↗

NASA NTRS2015

An Expert System-Driven Method for Parametric Trajectory Optimization During Conceptual Design

During the early phases of engineering design, the costs committed are high, costs incurred are low, and the design freedom is high. It is well documented that decisions made in these early design phases drive the entire design's life cycle cost. In a traditional paradigm, key design decisions are made when little is known about the design. As the design matures, design changes become more difficult in both cost and schedule to enact. The current capability-based paradigm, which has emerged because of the constrained economic environment, calls for the infusion of knowledge usually acquired during later design phases into earlier design phases, i.e. bringing knowledge acquired during preliminary and detailed design into pre-conceptual and conceptual design. An area of critical importance to launch vehicle design is the optimization of its ascent trajectory, as the optimal trajectory will be able to take full advantage of the launch vehicle's capability to deliver a maximum amount of payload into orbit. Hence, the optimal ascent trajectory plays an important role in the vehicle's affordability posture yet little of the information required to successfully optimize a trajectory is known early in the design phase. Thus, the current paradigm of optimizing ascent trajectories involves generating point solutions for every change in a vehicle's design parameters. This is often a very tedious, manual, and time-consuming task for the analysts. Moreover, the trajectory design space is highly non-linear and multi-modal due to the interaction of various constraints. When these obstacles are coupled with the Program to Optimize Simulated Trajectories (POST), an industry standard program to optimize ascent trajectories that is difficult to use, expert trajectory analysts are required to effectively optimize a vehicle's ascent trajectory. Over the course of this paper, the authors discuss a methodology developed at NASA Marshall's Advanced Concepts Office to address these issues. The methodology is two-fold: first, capture the heuristics developed by human analysts over their many years of experience; and secondly, leverage the power of modern computing to evaluate multiple trajectories simultaneously and therefore enable the exploration of the trajectory's design space early during the pre- conceptual and conceptual phases of design. This methodology is coupled with design of experiments in order to train surrogate models, which enables trajectory design space visualization and parametric optimal ascent trajectory information to be available when early design decisions are being made.

Dees, Patrick D.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Multi-Disciplinary Analysis Framework for the Design of Small Launch Vehicles

Between the years of 1995 and 2014 the number of small satellites (1-500 kg) went up from 20 to 180. [1] Out of the 180 launched in 2014 66% were Nano satellites (1-10 kg). [1] With this trend of smaller satellites, one would expect a rise in number of small launch vehicles (SLVs are defined by capability to carry 1-100 kg to orbit), but this has not happened: [3] only 8% of all small satellites are launched on SLVs and the others become secondary payloads on regular launch vehicles. [1] This results in small satellites being placed into either suboptimal orbits or waiting for launch schedules to align with bigger launches, resulting in long waiting times. Dedicated SLVs could improve the responsiveness of small satellite launches, but SLV design is complicated by the large architecture space needed to be explored in order to find efficient and affordable designs. The SLV architecture trade space contains many discrete options, e.g. solid vs. liquid fuels, air launch vs. ground launch, number of stages, etc. [2][3] Performing detailed analysis for all the options at once would be prohibitive. Thus, a sizing environment/framework that is capable of providing necessary information for conceptual-level trade studies and can rapidly explore the vast SLV architecture space is necessary. The framework, illustrated in Figure 1, consists of four disciplines central to the sizing and synthesis of launch vehicles: propulsion, aerodynamics, structures, and trajectory. For the aerodynamics and trajectory disciplines, Missile DATCOM and POST2 are used, respectively. The propulsion and structures disciplines are represented in the framework with tools developed at ASDL Georgia Tech. For propulsion, the Solid Motor Analysis Code (SMAC) is a physics-based conceptual design tool for solid rocket motors. SMAC is capable of geometric burn simulation, ballistic analysis, and prediction of thrust performance. [4] For structures, Launch Vehicle Structural Analysis (LVSA) tool is a physics-based tool that focuses on structural dynamic analysis with sizing capability. These tools are integrated into the framework illustrated in Figure 1 with the corresponding connections described in Table 1. The process flow is as follows: first, SMAC sizes insulation and calculates maximum operating pressures for each vehicle stage. The MEOP and insulation thickness values from SMAC are fed to LVSA which then utilizes this information to size the motor casing. This creates a feedback loop between LVSA and SMAC that converges on the radius available for fuel, casing, and insulation thickness. Once the stage sizing is converged on SMAC creates an engine deck that is passed to POST2. Next, the data from SMAC and LVSA goes into Missile DATCOM which generates an aerodynamics database for POST2. Finally, POST2 performs a targeting optimization while maximizing the payload mass to orbit. Within the framework, POST2 is automated in order to be robust to a wide variety of possible designs by performing a Monte Carlo simulation over the initialization vector of the POST2 optimization variables. To demonstrate the capability of this framework, a sample problem of exploring the design space of an SLV capable of placing satellites into a low Earth orbit (inclination=47 deg, 196.5 by 211.3 nm) is used. This sample problem is a ground-launched SLV consisting of four in-line SRM stages. The multidisciplinary design analysis (MDA) environment is utilized to explore a design space consisting of 22 continuous and 12 discrete variables, shown by Table 1 by blocks 1,2,3. Running a full factorial design of experiments (DOE) would have been prohibitively expensive even with this reduced design space, thus a space filling design with 3,502 and then additional expansion of 2,602 cases was used. The first DOE consisted of 3,502 cases, and all of the variables were varied. These input variables are listed in blocks 1, 2, and 3 in Table 1. Most of the variables are propulsion related with stage lengths determining the delta-V split of the SLV. The expansion consisted of 2,602 cases, and the continuous variables were set to be equal to the most promising designs from the sizing of first DOE. For each set of continuous variables, the discrete variables (grain type, star points, and propellant) were to varied. The results of the DOE can be seen in Figure 2; each of the points in this plot represents a closed launch vehicle that reaches the targeted orbit. For each of the cases, there is information on flown trajectory, structural, and propulsion properties of the SLV. For example, Figure 3 shows changes in altitude and velocity with time for a particular case. The right side of Figure 3 clearly shows the coasting (slow decrease) and burning phases (sharp increase) of the SLV mission. LV mass is positively correlated with the optimized payload mass to orbit because heavier LVs carry more fuel and thus have more stored chemical energy. Furthermore, for any given payload mass to orbit, the most efficient design would result in the smallest LV. The results as visualized in Figure 2 shows this tradeoff, and the Pareto frontier of the efficient designs can be seen along the dotted line. Figure 2 can be divided into regions with the lowest mass vehicles corresponding to the minimum bound on radius, and the highest mass vehicles corresponding to the maximum bound on radius. Within a mass region, the discrete variables, such as propellant type and propellant grain arrangement, have the most effect on payload mass. This paper presents an MDA framework that can perform an automated physics-based sizing of SLV designs and a corresponding methodology to utilize the MDA to explore the design space of SLVs. The proposed methodology was applied to a perform a design space exploration for a four stage SLV. The outputs show the expected pareto frontier forming and provide detailed information about the SLV performance and staging. Using the produced data, it will be possible to select a set of pareto optimal designs that can then be further explored in subsequent design cycles. This demonstration shows that automated design space exploration should be used in the early phase design of future SLV concepts.

Nikita S Birbasov↗

NASA NTRS1990

Artificial intelligence and design: Opportunities, research problems and directions

The issues of industrial productivity and economic competitiveness are of major significance in the U.S. at present. By advancing the science of design, and by creating a broad computer-based methodology for automating the design of artifacts and of industrial processes, we can attain dramatic improvements in productivity. It is our thesis that developments in computer science, especially in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and in related areas of advanced computing, provide us with a unique opportunity to push beyond the present level of computer aided automation technology and to attain substantial advances in the understanding and mechanization of design processes. To attain these goals, we need to build on top of the present state of AI, and to accelerate research and development in areas that are especially relevant to design problems of realistic complexity. We propose an approach to the special challenges in this area, which combines 'core work' in AI with the development of systems for handling significant design tasks. We discuss the general nature of design problems, the scientific issues involved in studying them with the help of AI approaches, and the methodological/technical issues that one must face in developing AI systems for handling advanced design tasks. Looking at basic work in AI from the perspective of design automation, we identify a number of research problems that need special attention. These include finding solution methods for handling multiple interacting goals, formation problems, problem decompositions, and redesign problems; choosing representations for design problems with emphasis on the concept of a design record; and developing approaches for the acquisition and structuring of domain knowledge with emphasis on finding useful approximations to domain theories. Progress in handling these research problems will have major impact both on our understanding of design processes and their automation, and also on several fundamental questions that are of intrinsic concern to AI. We present examples of current AI work on specific design tasks, and discuss new directions of research, both as extensions of current work and in the context of new design tasks where domain knowledge is either intractable or incomplete. The domains discussed include Digital Circuit Design, Mechanical Design of Rotational Transmissions, Design of Computer Architectures, Marine Design, Aircraft Design, and Design of Chemical Processes and Materials. Work in these domains is significant on technical grounds, and it is also important for economic and policy reasons.

Amarel, Saul↗

NASA NTRS1996

Design of Composite Structures Using Knowledge-Based and Case Based Reasoning

A method of using knowledge based and case based reasoning to assist designers during conceptual design tasks of composite structures was proposed. The cooperative use of heuristics, procedural knowledge, and previous similar design cases suggests a potential reduction in design cycle time and ultimately product lead time. The hypothesis of this work is that the design process of composite structures can be improved by using Case-Based Reasoning (CBR) and Knowledge-Based (KB) reasoning in the early design stages. The technique of using knowledge-based and case-based reasoning facilitates the gathering of disparate information into one location that is easily and readily available. The method suggests that the inclusion of downstream life-cycle issues into the conceptual design phase reduces potential of defective, and sub-optimal composite structures. Three industry experts were interviewed extensively. The experts provided design rules, previous design cases, and test problems. A Knowledge Based Reasoning system was developed using the CLIPS (C Language Interpretive Procedural System) environment and a Case Based Reasoning System was developed using the Design Memory Utility For Sharing Experiences (MUSE) xviii environment. A Design Characteristic State (DCS) was used to document the design specifications, constraints, and problem areas using attribute-value pair relationships. The DCS provided consistent design information between the knowledge base and case base. Results indicated that the use of knowledge based and case based reasoning provided a robust design environment for composite structures. The knowledge base provided design guidance from well defined rules and procedural knowledge. The case base provided suggestions on design and manufacturing techniques based on previous similar designs and warnings of potential problems and pitfalls. The case base complemented the knowledge base and extended the problem solving capability beyond the existence of limited well defined rules. The findings indicated that the technique is most effective when used as a design aid and not as a tool to totally automate the composites design process. Other areas of application and implications for future research are discussed.

Lambright, Jonathan Paul↗

DOE OSTI2024

Surrogate-assisted optimization under uncertainty for design for remanufacturing considering material price volatility

Remanufacturing is a well-established end-of-life (EOL) strategy that promises significant savings in energy and carbon emissions. However, the current design practices are not remanufacturing-inclusive, i.e., the majority of products are designed for a single life cycle. As a result, potential products that can sustain multiple life cycles are deprived of additional benefits of being designed for remanufacturing, such as reduced material usage, lower cost, and improved environmental impact. Moreover, the uncertainty in design, material selection, and economics are not considered to produce remanufacturable designs. Accordingly, this research proposes a design for remanufacturing (DfRem) framework that accounts for design uncertainty and material price volatility. The framework systematically explores the design space, performs design optimization under uncertainty, followed by topology optimization to provide additional mass savings, and finally, a price volatility analysis for plausible design material choices. The candidate designs are evaluated based on their design mass, material price volatility, failure mode characteristics, carbon footprint, and embodied energy impacts. The proposed framework's utility is demonstrated via the use of an engine cylinder head case study subjected to thermo-mechanical loads along with fatigue and wear failure. Considering grey cast iron and aluminum alloy as the design material choices, it was found that the cast iron design reduced the initial design mass by 6% as opposed to a 5% decrease for aluminum. On the other hand, about 8% area of the cast iron design failed due to fatigue, compared to 3% for aluminum. Here, we further observed that although the aluminum design provided better mechanical performance than the cast iron design, this material was more expensive and volatile in price.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2022

Resilience Design Patterns: A Structured Approach to Resilience at Extreme Scale (V.2.0)

Reliability is a serious concern for future extreme-scale high-performance computing (HPC) systems. Projections based on the current generation of HPC systems and technology roadmaps suggest the prevalence of very high fault rates in future systems. The errors resulting from these faults will propagate and generate various kinds of failures, which may result in outcomes ranging from result corruptions to catastrophic application crashes. Therefore, the resilience challenge for extreme-scale HPC systems requires coordination between various hardware and software technologies that are capable of handling a broad set of fault models at accelerated fault rates. Also, due to practical limits on power consumption in future HPC systems, they are likely to embrace innovative architectures, increasing the levels of hardware and software complexities. Therefore, the techniques that seek to improve resilience must navigate the complex trade-off space between resilience and the overheads to power consumption and performance. While the HPC community has developed various resilience solutions, application-level techniques as well as system-based solutions, the solution space of HPC resilience techniques remains fragmented. There are no formal methods to integrate the various HPC resilience techniques into composite solutions, nor are there methods to holistically evaluate the adequacy and efficacy of such solutions in terms of their protection coverage, and their performance & power efficiency characteristics. Additionally, few implementations of current resilience solutions are portable to newer architectures and software environments that will be deployed on future systems. We developed a new structured approach to the management of HPC resilience using the concept of resilience-based design patterns. In general, a design pattern is a repeatable solution to a commonly occurring problem. We identified the well-known solutions that are commonly used to deal with faults, errors and failures in HPC systems. In the initial design patterns specification (version 1.0), we described the various solutions, which address specific problems in the design of resilient HPC environments, in the form of patterns. Each pattern describes a problem caused by a fault, error or failure event in an HPC environment, and then describes the core of the solution of the problem in such a way that this solution may be adapted to different systems and implemented at different layers of the system stack. The catalog of these resilience design patterns provides designers with a collection of design elements. To construct complete resilience solutions using combinations of various patterns, we defined a framework that enhances HPC designers' understanding of the important constraints and the opportunities for the design patterns to be implemented and deployed at various layers of the system stack. The design framework is also useful for establishing interfaces and mechanisms to coordinate flexible fault management across hardware and software components, as well as to consider the trade-off between performance, resilience, and power consumption when constructing a solution. The resilience design patterns specification version 1.1 included more detailed explanations of the pattern solutions, the context in which the patterns are applicable, and the implications for hardware or software design. It also provided several additional examples and detailed case studies to demonstrate the use of patterns to build realistic solutions. In version 1.2 of the specification document, we have improved the pattern descriptions, including graphical representations of the pattern components. These improvements are largely based on critical comments, feedback and suggestions received from pattern experts and readers of the previous versions of the specification. The pattern classification has been modified to further clarify the relationships between pattern categories. This version of the specification also introduces a pattern language for resilience design patterns. The pattern language presents the patterns in the catalog as a network, revealing the relations among the resilience patterns. The language provides designers with the means to explore alternative techniques for handling a specific fault model that may have different efficiency and complexity characteristics. Using the pattern language also enables the design and implementation of comprehensive resilience solutions as a set of interconnected resilience patterns that can be instantiated across layers of the system stack. The overall goal of this work is to provide hardware and software designers, as well as the users and operators of HPC systems, a systematic methodology for the design and evaluation of resilience technologies in HPC systems that keep scientific applications running to a correct solution in a timely and cost-efficient manner despite frequent faults, errors, and failures of various types. Version 2.0 expands the resilience design pattern classification and catalog to include self-stabilization patterns and reliability, availability and performance models for each structural pattern.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

NASA NTRS2002

Structural Optimization of a Force Balance Using a Computational Experiment Design

This paper proposes a new approach to force balance structural optimization featuring a computational experiment design. Currently, this multi-dimensional design process requires the designer to perform a simplification by executing parameter studies on a small subset of design variables. This one-factor-at-a-time approach varies a single variable while holding all others at a constant level. Consequently, subtle interactions among the design variables, which can be exploited to achieve the design objectives, are undetected. The proposed method combines Modern Design of Experiments techniques to direct the exploration of the multi-dimensional design space, and a finite element analysis code to generate the experimental data. To efficiently search for an optimum combination of design variables and minimize the computational resources, a sequential design strategy was employed. Experimental results from the optimization of a non-traditional force balance measurement section are presented. An approach to overcome the unique problems associated with the simultaneous optimization of multiple response criteria is described. A quantitative single-point design procedure that reflects the designer's subjective impression of the relative importance of various design objectives, and a graphical multi-response optimization procedure that provides further insights into available tradeoffs among competing design objectives are illustrated. The proposed method enhances the intuition and experience of the designer by providing new perspectives on the relationships between the design variables and the competing design objectives providing a systematic foundation for advancements in structural design.

Parker, P. A.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Use of Probabilistic Engineering Methods in the Detailed Design and Development Phases of the NASA Ares Launch Vehicle

The United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is in the midst of a space exploration program called Constellation to send crew and cargo to the international Space Station, to the moon, and beyond. As part of the Constellation program, a new launch vehicle, Ares I, is being developed by NASA Marshall Space Flight Center. Designing a launch vehicle with high reliability and increased safety requires a significant effort in understanding design variability and design uncertainty at the various levels of the design (system, element, subsystem, component, etc.) and throughout the various design phases (conceptual, preliminary design, etc.). In a previous paper [1] we discussed a probabilistic functional failure analysis approach intended mainly to support system requirements definition, system design, and element design during the early design phases. This paper provides an overview of the application of probabilistic engineering methods to support the detailed subsystem/component design and development as part of the "Design for Reliability and Safety" approach for the new Ares I Launch Vehicle. Specifically, the paper discusses probabilistic engineering design analysis cases that had major impact on the design and manufacturing of the Space Shuttle hardware. The cases represent important lessons learned from the Space Shuttle Program and clearly demonstrate the significance of probabilistic engineering analysis in better understanding design deficiencies and identifying potential design improvement for Ares I. The paper also discusses the probabilistic functional failure analysis approach applied during the early design phases of Ares I and the forward plans for probabilistic design analysis in the detailed design and development phases.

Fayssal, Safie↗

NASA NTRS2017

CisLunar Habitat Internal Architecture Design Criteria

BACKGROUND: In preparation for human exploration to Mars, there is a need to define the development and test program that will validate deep space operations and systems. In that context, a Proving Grounds CisLunar habitat spacecraft is being defined as the next step towards this goal. This spacecraft will operate differently from the ISS or other spacecraft in human history. The performance envelope of this spacecraft (mass, volume, power, specifications, etc.) is being defined by the Future Capabilities Study Team. This team has recognized the need for a human-centered approach for the internal architecture of this spacecraft and has commissioned a CisLunar Phase-1 Habitat Internal Architecture Study Team to develop a NASA reference configuration, providing the Agency with a "smart buyer" approach for future acquisition. THE CISLUNAR HABITAT INTERNAL ARCHITECTURE STUDY: Overall, the CisLunar Habitat Internal Architecture study will address the most significant questions and risks in the current CisLunar architecture, habitation, and operations concept development. This effort is achieved through definition of design criteria, evaluation criteria and process, design of the CisLunar Habitat Phase-1 internal architecture, and the development and fabrication of internal architecture concepts combined with rigorous and methodical Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) evaluations and testing of the conceptual innovations in a controlled test environment. The vision of the CisLunar Habitat Internal Architecture Study is to design, build, and test a CisLunar Phase-1 Habitat Internal Architecture that will be used for habitation (e.g. habitability and human factors) evaluations. The evaluations will mature CisLunar habitat evaluation tools, guidelines, and standards, and will interface with other projects such as the Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Program integrated Power, Avionics, Software (iPAS), and Logistics for integrated human-in-the-loop testing. The mission of the CisLunar Habitat Internal Architecture Study is to become a forcing function to establish a common understanding of CisLunar Phase-1 Habitation Internal Architecture design criteria, processes, and tools. The scope of the CisLunar Habitat Internal Architecture study is to design, develop, demonstrate, and evaluate a Phase-1 CisLunar Habitat common module internal architecture based on design criteria agreed to by NASA, the International Partners, and Commercial Exploration teams. This task is to define the CisLunar Phase-1 Internal Architecture Government Reference Design, assist NASA in becoming a "smart buyer" for Phase-1 Habitat Concepts, and ultimately to derive standards and requirements from the Internal Architecture Design Process. The first step was to define a Habitat Internal Architecture Design Criteria and create a structured philosophy to be used by design teams as a filter by which critical aspects of consideration would be identified for the purpose of organizing and utilizing interior spaces. With design criteria in place, the team will develop a series of iterative internal architecture concept designs which will be assessed by means of an evaluation criteria and process. These assessments will successively drive and refine the design, leading to the combination and down-selection of design concepts. A single refined reference design configuration will be developed into in a medium-to-high fidelity mockup. A multi-day human-in-the-loop mission test will fully evaluate the reference design and validate its configuration. Lessons learned from the design and evaluation will enable the team to identify appropriate standards for Phase-1 CisLunar Habitat Internal Architecture and will enable NASA to develop derived requirements in support of maturing CisLunar Habitation capabilities. This paper will describe the criteria definition process, workshop event, and resulting CisLunar Phase-1 Habitat Internal Architecture Design Criteria.

Jones, R.↗

DOE OSTI2022

A framework to implement human reliability analysis during early design stages of advanced reactors

Nuclear power plants require human actions throughout their lifecycle from design, construction, operation, and decommissioning. However, for advanced reactors (e.g., Generation IV), the reliance on human intervention in safety-related actions is expected to be reduced or completely replaced by automated actions. The Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) Standard for Advanced Non-LWR Nuclear Power Plants requires that the impacts of all operator actions are captured and incorporated in the risk of the modeled plant. Moreover, the Modernization of Technical Requirements for Licensing Advanced Reactors requires human reliability analysis (HRA) to be included throughout all design and PRA development stages. However, due to the lack of details during the early design stages, HRA is often postponed until the design is mature enough. Conducting HRA in later design stages, though it may be adequate in capturing pre-, at-, and post-initiators comes short of informing the design itself in the iterative design lifecycle. Hence, this paper presents a framework to include HRA during the design's early stages, pre-conceptual or conceptual. The proposed framework provides a process for the removal of operator actions that do not contribute to the risk and the identification of all key operator actions that are critical to the safety of the design. The results of this framework are then used to inform the design of those safety-related operator actions to update the design further. Then, using information from the updated design, this framework can be reapplied to investigate the impact of the design update on human reliability. The PRA model of the X-energy's pre-conceptual Xe-100 high-temperature gas-cooled pebble-bed reactor (HTGR-PB) design is used to demonstrate the approach. In the pre-conceptual Xe-100 PRA model, also called Phase 0 PRA model, human actions were considered an integral part of analyzing the plant response to different initiating events. Hence, in this paper, all possible human actions in the Xe-100 PRA model are identified, analyzed, and removed to emulate a design relying only on the available automated control systems. The preliminary results of this assessment show how safe the Xe-100 design is even without crediting any human actions. The results also list necessary sequences in which operator actions are critical to the risk profile of the design.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2022

High Flux Isotope Reactor Low Enriched Uranium U-10Mo Fuel Design Parameters

Activities to convert the HFIR from HEU to LEU are ongoing as part of the US Department of Energy (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) nuclear nonproliferation mission. Design activities to study the conversion of HFIR from HEU to LEU fuel explored different fuel design features and shapes with a uranium-molybdenum (U-10Mo) monolithic alloy fuel. This high-density alloy contains 90 wt % uranium and 10 wt % molybdenum and has a uranium density of 15.318gU/cm 3 . The goal of these studies is to generate several candidate HFIR LEU fuel designs of varying fuel fabrication complexity that meet the current HEU performance metrics and safety requirements. Recent advancements in modeling and simulation tools and design methods enabled a thorough analysis of the available design space with U-10Mo fuel. A surrogate model used this analysis as training data to quickly determine the performance of a design given specific design parameters. An optimization module used this surrogate model to quickly search this multidimensional search space given specific desired performance characteristics. This approach was made possible by the large available design space with U-10Mo fuel. Shift, a Monte Carlo tool optimized for high-performance computing (HPC) architectures, was used for faster calculation and better data management for reactor physics simulations. Once most of these design studies were complete, a new suite called the Python HFIR Analysis and Measurement Engine (PHAME) was developed to connect all fuel design analysis steps, making design studies more efficient and reproducible. The post-processing capabilities of these new tools are leveraged for the information provided herein. Leveraging these tools, several candidate fuel designs were selected with varying levels of feature complexity and reactor performance. This report provides design feature details for four selected HFIR LEU U-10Mo fuel designs and their corresponding performance and safety metrics. Nominal best-estimate design parameters and irradiation conditions, including fission rate densities, power densities, heat fluxes, and cumulative fission densities, are provided. Simulations show that the high uranium density of U-10Mo fuel provides a large potential design space that enables various LEU designs to meet HEU core performance metrics and safety requirements with a power increase from 85 MW (HEU) to 95 MW or 100 MW (LEU).

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

NASA NTRS1992

An expert system for integrated structural analysis and design optimization for aerospace structures

The results of a research study on the development of an expert system for integrated structural analysis and design optimization is presented. An Object Representation Language (ORL) was developed first in conjunction with a rule-based system. This ORL/AI shell was then used to develop expert systems to provide assistance with a variety of structural analysis and design optimization tasks, in conjunction with procedural modules for finite element structural analysis and design optimization. The main goal of the research study was to provide expertise, judgment, and reasoning capabilities in the aerospace structural design process. This will allow engineers performing structural analysis and design, even without extensive experience in the field, to develop error-free, efficient and reliable structural designs very rapidly and cost-effectively. This would not only improve the productivity of design engineers and analysts, but also significantly reduce time to completion of structural design. An extensive literature survey in the field of structural analysis, design optimization, artificial intelligence, and database management systems and their application to the structural design process was first performed. A feasibility study was then performed, and the architecture and the conceptual design for the integrated 'intelligent' structural analysis and design optimization software was then developed. An Object Representation Language (ORL), in conjunction with a rule-based system, was then developed using C++. Such an approach would improve the expressiveness for knowledge representation (especially for structural analysis and design applications), provide ability to build very large and practical expert systems, and provide an efficient way for storing knowledge. Functional specifications for the expert systems were then developed. The ORL/AI shell was then used to develop a variety of modules of expert systems for a variety of modeling, finite element analysis, and design optimization tasks in the integrated aerospace structural design process. These expert systems were developed to work in conjunction with procedural finite element structural analysis and design optimization modules (developed in-house at SAT, Inc.). The complete software, AutoDesign, so developed, can be used for integrated 'intelligent' structural analysis and design optimization. The software was beta-tested at a variety of companies, used by a range of engineers with different levels of background and expertise. Based on the feedback obtained by such users, conclusions were developed and are provided.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1999

Launch Vehicle Design Process Description and Training Formulation

A primary NASA priority is to reduce the cost and improve the effectiveness of launching payloads into space. As a consequence, significant improvements are being sought in the effectiveness, cost, and schedule of the launch vehicle design process. In order to provide a basis for understanding and improving the current design process, a model has been developed for this complex, interactive process, as reported in the references. This model requires further expansion in some specific design functions. Also, a training course for less-experienced engineers is needed to provide understanding of the process, to provide guidance for its effective implementation, and to provide a basis for major improvements in launch vehicle design process technology. The objective of this activity is to expand the description of the design process to include all pertinent design functions, and to develop a detailed outline of a training course on the design process for launch vehicles for use in educating engineers whose experience with the process has been minimal. Building on a previously-developed partial design process description, parallel sections have been written for the Avionics Design Function, the Materials Design Function, and the Manufacturing Design Function. Upon inclusion of these results, the total process description will be released as a NASA TP. The design function sections herein include descriptions of the design function responsibilities, interfaces, interactive processes, decisions (gates), and tasks. Associated figures include design function planes, gates, and tasks, along with other pertinent graphics. Also included is an expanded discussion of how the design process is divided, or compartmentalized, into manageable parts to achieve efficient and effective design. A detailed outline for an intensive two-day course on the launch vehicle design process has been developed herein, and is available for further expansion. The course is in an interactive lecture/workshop format to engage the participants in active learning. The course addresses the breadth and depth of the process, requirements, phases, participants, multidisciplinary aspects, tasks, critical elements,as well as providing guidance from previous lessons learned. The participants are led to develop their own understanding of the current process and how it can be improved. Included are course objectives and a session-by-session outline of course content. Also included is an initial identification of visual aid requirements.

Atherton, James↗

NASA NTRS1999

Analysis and Inverse Design of the HSR Arrow Wing Configuration with Fuselage, Wing, and Flow Through Nacelles

The design process for developing the natural flow wing design on the HSR arrow wing configuration utilized several design tools and analysis methods. Initial fuselage/wing designs were generated with inviscid analysis and optimization methods in conjunction with the natural flow wing design philosophy. A number of designs were generated, satisfying different system constraints. Of the three natural flow wing designs developed, the NFWAc2 configuration is the design which satisfies the constraints utilized by McDonnell Douglas Aerospace (MDA) in developing a series of optimized configurations; a wind tunnel model of the MDA designed OPT5 configuration was constructed and tested. The present paper is concerned with the viscous analysis and inverse design of the arrow wing configurations, including the effects of the installed diverters/nacelles. Analyses were conducted with OVERFLOW, a Navier-Stokes flow solver for overset grids. Inverse designs were conducted with OVERDISC, which couples OVERFLOW with the CDISC inverse design method. An initial system of overset grids was generated for the OPT5 configuration with installed diverters/nacelles. An automated regridding process was then developed to use the OPT5 component grids to create grids for the natural flow wing designs. The inverse design process was initiated using the NFWAc2 configuration as a starting point, eventually culminating in the NFWAc4 design-for which a wind tunnel model was constructed. Due to the time constraints on the design effort, initial analyses and designs were conducted with a fairly coarse grid; subsequent analyses have been conducted on a refined system of grids. Comparisons of the computational results to experiment are provided at the end of this paper.

Krist, Steven E.↗

NASA NTRS2007

Generative Representations for Automated Design of Robots

A method of automated design of complex, modular robots involves an evolutionary process in which generative representations of designs are used. The term generative representations as used here signifies, loosely, representations that consist of or include algorithms, computer programs, and the like, wherein encoded designs can reuse elements of their encoding and thereby evolve toward greater complexity. Automated design of robots through synthetic evolutionary processes has already been demonstrated, but it is not clear whether genetically inspired search algorithms can yield designs that are sufficiently complex for practical engineering. The ultimate success of such algorithms as tools for automation of design depends on the scaling properties of representations of designs. A nongenerative representation (one in which each element of the encoded design is used at most once in translating to the design) scales linearly with the number of elements. Search algorithms that use nongenerative representations quickly become intractable (search times vary approximately exponentially with numbers of design elements), and thus are not amenable to scaling to complex designs. Generative representations are compact representations and were devised as means to circumvent the above-mentioned fundamental restriction on scalability. In the present method, a robot is defined by a compact programmatic form (its generative representation) and the evolutionary variation takes place on this form. The evolutionary process is an iterative one, wherein each cycle consists of the following steps: 1. Generative representations are generated in an evolutionary subprocess. 2. Each generative representation is a program that, when compiled, produces an assembly procedure. 3. In a computational simulation, a constructor executes an assembly procedure to generate a robot. 4. A physical-simulation program tests the performance of a simulated constructed robot, evaluating the performance according to a fitness criterion to yield a figure of merit that is fed back into the evolutionary subprocess of the next iteration. In comparison with prior approaches to automated evolutionary design of robots, the use of generative representations offers two advantages: First, a generative representation enables the reuse of components in regular and hierarchical ways and thereby serves a systematic means of creating more complex modules out of simpler ones. Second, the evolved generative representation may capture intrinsic properties of the design problem, so that variations in the representations move through the design space more effectively than do equivalent variations in a nongenerative representation. This method has been demonstrated by using it to design some robots that move, variously, by walking, rolling, or sliding. Some of the robots were built (see figure). Although these robots are very simple, in comparison with robots designed by humans, their structures are more regular, modular, hierarchical, and complex than are those of evolved designs of comparable functionality synthesized by use of nongenerative representations.

Homby, Gregory S.↗

DOE OSTI2020

Mind the Gap: Building Simulation in the Architectural Design Studio

Building modelling and simulation approaches are increasingly being utilized in architectural design studios to guide and inform the design process and offer evidence-based feedback on proposed building performance. The development of intuitive and simplified simulation interfaces has greatly contributed to achieving this integration. One aspect that is often overlooked is the workflow that governs and regulates integrated design, which can have significant impacts on final design outcomes. Currently there are numerous software packages available for building performance simulations. This makes it challenging to select an appropriate tool that provides accurate results yet allows a designer to make informed architectural decisions with a designer-friendly interface. Furthermore, workflows to incorporate simulations into the design process proved to highly impact student’s project design integration. Yet, it is not clear what type of workflows are successful to achieve this goal, under what conditions, and/or for which building and site typologies. This paper addresses these issues by first reviewing three different workflows for integrating building performance simulation processes and highlighting their strengths and weaknesses. Second, a comparative case study approach was employed to test three of the most common workflows in three different integrated design architectural studios at the senior and vertical studio levels as well as in two courses that run parallel and complementary to the design studios. The workflows, processes, and the resultant student projects were further analyzed based on criteria for better integrated design and architectural excellence as outlined in the American Institute of Architects Committee on the Environment (AIA COTE) Top 10 Student’s Competition. Third, to situate the pedagogical case studies’ results within a larger context, a survey of the AIA COTE Top 10 student competition award recipients over the last five years was conducted. The results are summarized in a pedagogical framework that outlines best strategies of the type of workflows, software, design process used, methods to achieve desired interaction between design process and analytical feedback, and metrics for educators to evaluate the success of this integration and their learning outcomes in the design studio. The goal is to help bridge the gap between the building design and simulation within the design studio’s creative process for more integrated design outcomes.

Elzeyadi, Ihab↗