SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
We review four recent NASA-funded applications in which evolutionary/genetic methods are important. In the process we survey: the kinds of problems being solved today with these methods; techniques and tools used; problems encountered; and areas where research is needed. The presentation slides are annotated briefly at the top of each page.
Engineering is an interactive process that requires intelligent interaction at many levels. My thesis [1] advances an engineering discipline for high-level synthesis and architectural decomposition that integrates perspicuous representation, designer interaction, and mathematical rigor. Starfish, the software prototype for the design method, implements a table-centric transformation system for reorganizing control-dominated system expressions into high-level architectures. Based on the digital design derivation (DDD) system a designer-guided synthesis technique that applies correctness preserving transformations to synchronous data flow specifications expressed as co- recursive stream equations Starfish enhances user interaction and extends the reachable design space by incorporating four innovations: behavior tables, serialization tables, data refinement, and operator retiming. Behavior tables express systems of co-recursive stream equations as a table of guarded signal updates. Developers and users of the DDD system used manually constructed behavior tables to help them decide which transformations to apply and how to specify them. These design exercises produced several formally constructed hardware implementations: the FM9001 microprocessor, an SECD machine for evaluating LISP, and the SchemEngine, garbage collected machine for interpreting a byte-code representation of compiled Scheme programs. Bose and Tuna, two of DDD s developers, have subsequently commercialized the design derivation methodology at Derivation Systems, Inc. (DSI). DSI has formally derived and validated PCI bus interfaces and a Java byte-code processor; they further executed a contract to prototype SPIDER-NASA's ultra-reliable communications bus. To date, most derivations from DDD and DRS have targeted hardware due to its synchronous design paradigm. However, Starfish expressions are independent of the synchronization mechanism; there is no commitment to hardware or globally broadcast clocks. Though software back-ends for design derivation are limited to the DDD stream-interpreter, targeting synchronous or real-time software is not substantively different from targeting hardware.
The workshop was oriented to disclose information and unsettled problems to understand the fundamental physical mechanism of the droplet formation process. Based on presentation and discussion of results, recommendations were made which should lead to associated future activities. To accomplish this task, existing observations and experiments, contributing to the basic knowledge, providing data for analytical concept verification, and forming a basis for empirical correlations were solicited. Advanced analytical modeling methods or results from specific studies were requested as well as the experience and advice from injector designers. All effort is directed to advance current analytical techniques, simulating the flow behavior downstream of the injection elements in a liquid rocket combustion chamber. Such a tool can be used to optimize injector designs with respect to short length weight savings, wall material protection, or large heat energy transport to a regenerative cooling fluid, while simultaneously achieving the maximum specific impulse in performance. The liquid atomization process also forms a sound basis for combustion instability analysis.
The 'computational test-cell' will enable the incorporation of new methodologies, such as concurrent engineering and probabilistic methods, into the propulsion design process. This will provide the capability to conduct credible, interdisciplinary analyses of new propulsion concepts and designs. Probabilistic methods can be used as the basis for reliability-based design. Recently methods have been devised that provide the capability of simulating the performance of propulsion systems at several levels of resolution. These methods make it possible to quantify uncertainty and to establish confidence bounds for the calculated values. The introduction of reliability-based design methodology along with probabilistic analyses will provide a tool to reduce the design space for new systems and to reduce our dependence on hardware testing for proof-of-concept and system integration demonstrations. The resulting simulations will reduce the need for testing and identify potential operational problems early in the design process. This capability will make it possible to compute the expected performance, stability, reliability, and life of propulsion components, subsystems, and systems at design and off-design conditions, to bring life cycle cost trade-offs early into the design process and to determine optimum designs to satisfy specified mission requirements.
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) has considerably evolved in the last decade. There are many computer programs that can perform computations on viscous internal or external flows with chemical reactions. CFD has become a commonly used tool in the design and analysis of gas turbines, ramjet combustors, turbo-machinery, inlet ducts, rocket engines, jet interaction, missile, and ramjet nozzles. One of the problems of interest to NASA has always been the performance prediction for rocket and air-breathing engines. Due to the complexity of flow in these engines it is necessary to resolve the flowfield into a fine mesh to capture quantities like turbulence and heat transfer. However, calculation on a high-resolution grid is associated with a prohibitively increasing computational time that can downgrade the value of the CFD for practical engineering calculations. The Liquid Thrust Chamber Performance (LTCP) code was developed for NASA/MSFC (Marshall Space Flight Center) to perform liquid rocket engine performance calculations. This code is a 2D/axisymmetric full Navier-Stokes (NS) solver with fully coupled finite rate chemistry and Eulerian treatment of liquid fuel and/or oxidizer droplets. One of the advantages of this code has been the resemblance of its input file to the JANNAF (Joint Army Navy NASA Air Force Interagency Propulsion Committee) standard TDK code, and its automatic grid generation for JANNAF defined combustion chamber wall geometry. These options minimize the learning effort for TDK users, and make the code a good candidate for performing engineering calculations. Although the LTCP code was developed for liquid rocket engines, it is a general-purpose code and has been used for solving many engineering problems. However, the single zone formulation of the LTCP has limited the code to be applicable to problems with complex geometry. Furthermore, the computational time becomes prohibitively large for high-resolution problems with chemistry, two-equation turbulence model, and two-phase flow. To overcome these limitations, the LTCP code is rewritten to include the multi-zone capability with domain decomposition that makes it suitable for parallel processing, i.e., enabling the code to run every zone or sub-domain on a separate processor. This can reduce the run time by a factor of 6 to 8, depending on the problem.
Ceramic matrix composites are being evaluated as candidate materials for many high temperature applications such as engine combustor liners for the High-Speed Civil Transport (HSCT). They are required to have an assured life of several thousand hours. Estimating the reliability of these components is quite a complex process and requires knowledge of the uncertainties that occur at various scales. The properties of ceramic matrix composites (CMC) are known to display a considerable amount of scatter due to variations in fiber/matrix properties, interphase/coating properties, bonding, amount of matrix voids, and many geometry- and fabrication-related parameters such as ply thickness and ply orientations. The objective of this research effort is to account for these uncertainties in a formal way by probabilistically analyzing both the stiffness- and strength related properties of CMC's. In current deterministic approaches, uncertainties are usually accounted for by safety factors. This approach often yields overly conservative designs, thereby reducing the potential of many advanced composite materials.
We present a multigrid one-shot algorithm, and a smoothing analysis, for the numerical solution of optimal control problems which are governed by an elliptic PDE. The analysis provides a simple tool to determine a smoothing minimization process which is essential for multigrid application. Numerical results include optimal control of boundary data using different discretization schemes and an optimal shape design problem in 2D with Dirichlet boundary conditions.
This research effort is a joint program between the Departments of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering and the Computer Science and Engineering Department at the University of Notre Dame. The purpose of the project was to develop a framework and systematic methodology to facilitate the application of Multidisciplinary Design Optimization (MDO) to a diverse class of system design problems. For all practical aerospace systems, the design of a systems is a complex sequence of events which integrates the activities of a variety of discipline "experts" and their associated "tools". The development, archiving and exchange of information between these individual experts is central to the design task and it is this information which provides the basis for these experts to make coordinated design decisions (i.e., compromises and trade-offs) - resulting in the final product design. Grant efforts focused on developing and evaluating frameworks for effective design coordination within a MDO environment. Central to these research efforts was the concept that the individual discipline "expert", using the most appropriate "tools" available and the most complete description of the system should be empowered to have the greatest impact on the design decisions and final design. This means that the overall process must be highly interactive and efficiently conducted if the resulting design is to be developed in a manner consistent with cost and time requirements. The methods developed as part of this research effort include; extensions to a sensitivity based Concurrent Subspace Optimization (CSSO) NMO algorithm; the development of a neural network response surface based CSSO-MDO algorithm; and the integration of distributed computing and process scheduling into the MDO environment. This report overviews research efforts in each of these focus. A complete bibliography of research produced with support of this grant is attached.
This research effort is a joint program between the Departments of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering and the Computer Science and Engineering Department at the University of Notre Dame. Three Principal Investigators; Drs. Renaud, Brockman and Batill directed this effort. During the four and a half year grant period, six Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering Ph.D. students and one Masters student received full or partial support, while four Computer Science and Engineering Ph.D. students and one Masters student were supported. During each of the summers up to four undergraduate students were involved in related research activities. The purpose of the project was to develop a framework and systematic methodology to facilitate the application of Multidisciplinary Design Optimization (N4DO) to a diverse class of system design problems. For all practical aerospace systems, the design of a systems is a complex sequence of events which integrates the activities of a variety of discipline "experts" and their associated "tools". The development, archiving and exchange of information between these individual experts is central to the design task and it is this information which provides the basis for these experts to make coordinated design decisions (i.e., compromises and trade-offs) - resulting in the final product design. Grant efforts focused on developing and evaluating frameworks for effective design coordination within a MDO environment. Central to these research efforts was the concept that the individual discipline "expert", using the most appropriate "tools" available and the most complete description of the system should be empowered to have the greatest impact on the design decisions and final design. This means that the overall process must be highly interactive and efficiently conducted if the resulting design is to be developed in a manner consistent with cost and time requirements. The methods developed as part of this research effort include; extensions to a sensitivity based Concurrent Subspace Optimization (CSSO) MDO algorithm; the development of a neural network response surface based CSSO-MDO algorithm; and the integration of distributed computing and process scheduling into the MDO environment. This report overviews research efforts in each of these focus. A complete bibliography of research produced with support of this grant is attached.
MRO project is a system of systems requiring system engineering team to architect, design, integrate, test, and operate these systems at each level of the project. The challenge of system engineering mission objectives into a single mission architecture that can be integrated tested, launched, and operated. Systems engineering must translate high-level requirements into integrated mission design. Systems engineering challenges were overcome utilizing a combination by creative designs built into MRO's flight and ground systems: a) Design of sophisticated spacecraft targeting and data management capabilities b) Establishment of a strong operations team organization; c) Implementation of robust operational processes; and d) Development of strategic ground tools. The MRO system has met the challenge of its driving requirements: a) MRO began its two-year primary science phase on November 7, 2006, and by July 2007, met it minimum requirement to collect 15 Tbits of data after only eight months of operations. Currently we have collected 22 Tbits. b) Based on current performance, mission data return could return 70 Tbits of data by the end of the primary science phase in 2008.
This software analyzes Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO) orbital geometry with respect to Mars Exploration Rover (MER) contact windows, and is the first tool of its kind designed specifically to support MRO-MER interface coordination. Prior to this automated tool, this analysis was done manually with Excel and the UNIX command line. In total, the process would take approximately 30 minutes for each analysis. The current automated analysis takes less than 30 seconds. This tool resides on the flight machine and uses a PHP interface that does the entire analysis of the input files and takes into account one-way light time from another input file. Input flies are copied over to the proper directories and are dynamically read into the tool s interface. The user can then choose the corresponding input files based on the time frame desired for analysis. After submission of the Web form, the tool merges the two files into a single, time-ordered listing of events for both spacecraft. The times are converted to the same reference time (Earth Transmit Time) by reading in a light time file and performing the calculations necessary to shift the time formats. The program also has the ability to vary the size of the keep-out window on the main page of the analysis tool by inputting a custom time for padding each MRO event time. The parameters on the form are read in and passed to the second page for analysis. Everything is fully coded in PHP and can be accessed by anyone with access to the machine via Web page. This uplink tool will continue to be used for the duration of the MER mission's needs for X-band uplinks. Future missions also can use the tools to check overflight times as well as potential site observation times. Adaptation of the input files to the proper format, and the window keep-out times, would allow for other analyses. Any operations task that uses the idea of keep-out windows will have a use for this program.
Disciplined approach to Fault Management (FM) has not always been emphasized by projects, contributing to major schedule and cost overruns: (1) Often faults aren't addressed until nominal spacecraft design is fairly stable. (2) Design relegated to after-the-fact patchwork, Band-Aid approach. Progress is being made on a number of fronts outside of Handbook effort: (1) Processes, Practices and Tools being developed at some Centers and Institutions (2) Management recognition. Constellation FM roles, Discovery/New Frontiers mission reviews (3) Potential Technology solutions. New approaches could avoid many current pitfalls (3a) New FM architectures, including model-based approach integrated with NASA's MBSE (Model-Based System Engineering) efforts (3b) NASA's Office of the Chief Technologist: FM identified in seven of NASA's 14 Space Technology Roadmaps. Opportunity to coalesce and establish thrust area to progressively develop new FM techniques. FM Handbook will help ensure that future missions do not encounter same FM-related problems as previous missions. Version 1 of the FM Handbook is a good start: (1) Still need Version 2 Agency-wide FM Handbook to expand Handbook to other areas, especially crewed missions. (2) Still need to reach out to other organizations to develop common understanding and vocabulary. Handbook doesn't/can't address all Workshop recommendations. Still need to identify how to address programmatic and infrastructure issues.
The NASA Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) program is a public-private partnership model that seeks commercial development of deep space exploration capabilities to support extensive human spaceflight missions around and beyond cislunar space. NASA first issued the Phase 1 NextSTEP Broad Agency Announcement to U.S. industries in 2014, which called for innovative cislunar habitation concepts that leveraged commercialization plans for low Earth orbit. These habitats will be part of the Deep Space Gateway (DSG), the cislunar space station planned by NASA for construction in the 2020s. In 2016, Phase 2 of the NextSTEP program selected five commercial partners to develop ground prototypes. A team of NASA research engineers and subject matter experts have been tasked with developing the ground test protocol that will serve as the primary means by which these Phase 2 prototype habitats will be evaluated. Since 2008, this core test team has successfully conducted multiple spaceflight analog mission evaluations utilizing a consistent set of operational products, tools, methods, and metrics to enable the iterative development, testing, analysis, and validation of evolving exploration architectures, operations concepts, and vehicle designs. The purpose of implementing a similar evaluation process for the NextSTEP Phase 2 Habitation Concepts is to consistently evaluate the different commercial partner ground prototypes to provide data-driven, actionable recommendations for Phase 3.
The NASA Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) program is a public-private partnership model that seeks commercial development of deep space exploration capabilities to support human spaceflight missions around and beyond cislunar space. NASA first issued the Phase 1 NextSTEP Broad Agency Announcement to U.S. industries in 2014, which called for innovative cislunar habitation concepts that leveraged commercialization plans for low-Earth orbit. These habitats will be part of the Deep Space Gateway (DSG), the cislunar space station planned by NASA for construction in the 2020s. In 2016, Phase 2 of the NextSTEP program selected five commercial partners to develop ground prototypes. A team of NASA research engineers and subject matter experts (SMEs) have been tasked with developing the ground-test protocol that will serve as the primary means by which these Phase 2 prototypes will be evaluated. Since 2008, this core test team has successfully conducted multiple spaceflight analog mission evaluations utilizing a consistent set of operational tools, methods, and metrics to enable the iterative development, testing, analysis, and validation of evolving exploration architectures, operations concepts, and vehicle designs. The purpose of implementing a similar evaluation process for the Phase 2 Habitation Concepts is to consistently evaluate different commercial partner ground prototypes to provide data-driven, actionable recommendations for Phase 3. This paper describes the process by which the ground test protocol was developed and the objectives, methods, and metrics by which the NextSTEP Phase 2 Habitation Concepts will be rigorously and systematically evaluated. The protocol has been developed using both a top-down and bottom-up approach. Top-down development began with the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) exploration objectives and ISS Exploration Capability Study Team (IECST) candidate flight objectives. Strategic questions and associated rationales, derived from these candidate architectural objectives, provide the framework by which the ground-test protocol will address the DSG stack elements and configurations, systems and subsystems, and habitation, science, and EVA functions. From these strategic questions, high-level functional requirements for the DSG were drafted and associated ground-test objectives and analysis protocols were established. Bottom-up development incorporated objectives from NASA SMEs in autonomy, avionics and software, communication, environmental control and life support systems, exercise, extravehicular activity, exploration medical operations, guidance navigation and control, human factors and behavioral performance, human factors and habitability, logistics, Mission Control Center operations, power, radiation, robotics, safety and mission assurance, science, simulation, structures, thermal, trash management, and vehicle health. Top-down and bottom-up objectives were integrated to form overall functional requirements - ground-test objectives and analysis mapping. From this mapping, ground-test objectives were organized into those that will be evaluated through inspection, demonstration, analysis, subsystem standalone testing, and human-in-the-loop (HITL) testing. For the HITL tests, mission-like timelines, procedures, and flight rules have been developed to directly meet ground test objectives and evaluate specific functional requirements. Data collected from these assessments will be analyzed to determine the acceptability of habitation element configurations and the combinations of capabilities that will result in the best habitation platform to be recommended by the test team for Phase 3.
For over a decade, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has tracked and configuration-managed approximately 30 risks to astronaut health and performance that occur before, during and after spaceflight. The Human System Risk Board (HSRB), a Health and Medical Technical Authority (HMTA) Board at NASA Johnson Space Center, is the entity responsible for identifying, assessing, analyzing, and monitoring the official understanding of the risk or risk posture for each of the Human System Risks and determining – based on evaluation of the available evidence – when that risk posture changes. The ultimate purpose of tracking and researching these risks is to find ways to reduce the risk that astronaut crews face during spaceflight. Historically, research, development and operations relevant to one risk have been conducted in isolation from other risks; these individual risk ‘silos’ enabled initial characterization of each specific risk. In spaceflight however, the impact of exposure to risk for astronaut crews is cumulative, and not independent of exposures or other risks, as all the adverse effects of the spaceflight environment begin at launch, continue throughout the duration of the mission and in some cases across the lifetime of the crews. In January of 2020, the HSRB at NASA embarked on a pilot project designed to assess the potential value of causal diagramming as a tool to facilitate understanding of these cumulative and interdependent effects as applied within Human System Risk management. This process uses directed acyclic graphs as a means of formalizing a shared mental model of the causal flow of risk among Risk Board stakeholders. Initially this model was to improve communication among those stakeholders, but the potential value exceeds communication alone. The causal diagrams are formulated as directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) to function as a type of knowledge graph for reference for the board and its stakeholders. This document is a sister document to NASA/TM 20220006812 Directed Acyclic Graph Guidance Documentation (1). In that document, the basic guidance for creating and standardizing directed acyclic graphs as tools for cross-risk analysis is provided. This document contains the initial configuration managed DAGs that were created as a result of applying those principles. These initial versions were accepted by the HSRB in January of 2022. Each of the Human System Risks are represented by a DAG that has been reviewed by the larger Human Health and Performance community at NASA including life scientists, physical scientists, physicians, nurses, pharmacists, exercise specialists and more. These results show the starting point for Human System Risk DAGs as shared mental models and communication aids across the boundaries of the various expertise needed to understand and mitigate the human risks in spaceflight. Because they are a starting point, each of these DAGs can be expected to change over time as new or refined evidence becomes available. The process for updating these DAGs can be found in the JSC-66705 Human System Risk Management Plan (2) that is publicly available on the NASA Technical Reports Server.
In the late 80's, conceptual designs for an in situ oxygen production plant were documented in a study by Eagle Engineering [1]. In the "Summary of Findings" of this study, it is clearly pointed out that: "reported process mass and power estimates lack a consistent basis to allow comparison." The study goes on to say: "A study to produce a set of process mass, power, and volume requirements on a consistent basis is recommended." Today, approximately twenty years later, as humans plan to return to the moon and venture beyond, the need for flexible up-to-date models of the oxygen extraction production process has become even more clear. Multiple processes for the production of oxygen from lunar regolith are being investigated by NASA, academia, and industry. Three processes that have shown technical merit are molten regolith electrolysis, hydrogen reduction, and carbothermal reduction. These processes have been selected by NASA as the basis for the development of the ISRU System Model Tool (ISMT). In working to develop up-to-date system models for these processes NASA hopes to accomplish the following: (1) help in the evaluation process to select the most cost-effective and efficient process for further prototype development, (2) identify key parameters, (3) optimize the excavation and oxygen production processes, and (4) provide estimates on energy and power requirements, mass and volume of the system, oxygen production rate, mass of regolith required, mass of consumables, and other important parameters. Also, as confidence and high fidelity is achieved with each component's model, new techniques and processes can be introduced and analyzed at a fraction of the cost of traditional hardware development and test approaches. A first generation ISRU System Model Tool has been used to provide inputs to the Lunar Architecture Team studies.
Background: Probabilistic risk analysis (PRA) is a method for estimating risk in complex engineered systems that, at a basic level, focuses on what can go wrong and the likelihood and consequences of those occurrences. NASA has used PRA as an integral component of medical system risk estimation and design for spaceflight. IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces) is a novel tool to meet these goals for exploration missions. Overview: IMPACT performs hundreds of thousands of Monte Carlo simulations of missions to build aggregate pictures of medical risk. These simulations are based on 120 possible medical conditions (the IMPACT Condition List) selected in a consensus-based process because they are of highest likelihood and/or consequence for exploration spaceflight. The conditions are then tied to clinical capabilities which can be used for management (e.g., inserting an IV) and then to over 600 specific resources needed to deliver a capability (e.g., an angiocath or an ultrasound). Different mission profiles can be simulated with user-specified inputs such as mission duration, destination, number of crew and pre-existing medical conditions, and EVA frequency. While the IMPACT evidence base is designed for exploration environments, these user inputs allow the tool to be used across a broad range of missions. IMPACT’s primary outcome metrics include loss of crew life (LOCL, a measure of in-flight mortality due to medical conditions), need for evacuation (RTDC, return to definitive care), and crew disability (TTL, task time lost based on how medical conditions impact the ability to perform over 1000 specific exploration mission crew tasks). In addition to modeling medical risk, IMPACT also accepts user-specified constraints, such as limitations of mass or volume, and will output a recommended clinical capability set and specific medical resources that meet the mission constraints. Discussion: This abstract will provide an introduction to IMPACT and describe the nature of the underlying medical evidence. It will also detail potential use cases for how this tool can be utilized by NASA or commercial spaceflight providers.
Lessons learned for composite structures are presented in three technology areas: materials, manufacturing, and design. In addition, future challenges for composite structures are presented. Composite materials have long gestation periods from the developmental stage to fully matured production status. Many examples exist of unsuccessful attempts to accelerate this gestation period. Experience has shown that technology transition of a new material system to fully matured production status is time consuming, involves risk, is expensive and should not be undertaken lightly. The future challenges for composite materials require an intensification of the science based approach to material development, extension of the vendor/customer interaction process to include all engineering disciplines of the end user, reduced material costs because they are a significant factor in overall part cost, and improved batch-to-batch pre-preg physical property control. Historical manufacturing lessons learned are presented using current in-service production structure as examples. Most producibility problems for these structures can be traced to their sequential engineering design. This caused an excessive emphasis on design-to-weight and schedule at the expense of design-to-cost. This resulted in expensive performance originated designs, which required costly tooling and led to non-producible parts. Historically these problems have been allowed to persist throughout the production run. The current/future approach for the production of affordable composite structures mandates concurrent engineering design where equal emphasis is placed on product and process design. Design for simplified assembly is also emphasized, since assembly costs account for a major portion of total airframe costs. The future challenge for composite manufacturing is, therefore, to utilize concurrent engineering in conjunction with automated manufacturing techniques to build affordable composite structures. Composite design experience has shown that significant weight savings have been achieved, outstanding fatigue and corrosion resistance have been demonstrated, and in-service performance has been very successful. Currently no structural design show stoppers exist for composite structures. A major lesson learned is that the full scale static test is the key test for composites, since it is the primary structural 'hot spot' indicator. The major durability issue is supportability of thin skinned structure. Impact damage has been identified as the most significant issue for the damage tolerance control of composite structures. However, delaminations induced during assembly operations have demonstrated a significant nuisance value. The future challenges for composite structures are threefold. Firstly, composite airframe weight fraction should increase to 60 percent. At the same time, the cost of composite structures must be reduced by 50 percent to attain the goal of affordability. To support these challenges it is essential to develop lower cost materials and processes.