Results for “Early Test” — Page 55

NASA NTRS2003

Propulsion Flight-Test Fixture

NASA Dryden Flight Research Center s new Propulsion Flight Test Fixture (PFTF), designed in house, is an airborne engine-testing facility that enables engineers to gather flight data on small experimental engines. Without the PFTF, it would be necessary to obtain such data from traditional wind tunnels, ground test stands, or laboratory test rigs. Traditionally, flight testing is reserved for the last phase of engine development. Generally, engines that embody new propulsion concepts are not put into flight environments until their designs are mature: in such cases, either vehicles are designed around the engines or else the engines are mounted in or on missiles. However, a captive carry capability of the PFTF makes it possible to test engines that feature air-breathing designs (for example, designs based on the rocket-based combined cycle) economically in subscale experiments. The discovery of unknowns made evident through flight tests provides valuable information to engine designers early in development, before key design decisions are made, thereby potentially affording large benefits in the long term. This is especially true in the transonic region of flight (from mach 0.9 to around 1.2), where it can be difficult to obtain data from wind tunnels and computational fluid dynamics. In January 2002, flight-envelope expansion to verify the design and capabilities of the PFTF was completed. The PFTF was flown on a specially equipped supersonic F-15B research testbed airplane, mounted on the airplane at a center-line attachment fixture, as shown in Figure 1. NASA s F-15B testbed has been used for several years as a flight-research platform. Equipped with extensive research air-data, video, and other instrumentation systems, the airplane carries externally mounted test articles. Traditionally, the majority of test articles flown have been mounted at the centerline tank-attachment fixture, which is a hard-point (essentially, a standardized weapon-mounting fixture). This hard-point has large weight margins, and, because it is located near the center of gravity of the airplane, the weight of equipment mounted there exerts a minimal effect on the stability and controllability of the airplane. The PFTF (see Figure 2) includes a one-piece aluminum structure that contains space for instrumentation, propellant tanks, and feed-system components. The PFTF also houses a force balance, on which is mounted the subscale engine or other experimental apparatus that is to be the subject of a flight test. The force balance measures a combination of inertial and aerodynamic forces and moments acting on the experimental apparatus.

Palumbo, Nate↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Environmental Control and Life Support Technology Development for Exploration: 2021 to 2022 Overview

Over the past year, significant progress has occurred in technology development, ground testing, and ISS technology demonstrations within the NASA Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLSS) community. This paper provides a technology development update in the following capability areas: life support, environmental monitoring, fire safety, and logistics. Technologies for exploration missions must be reliable in their operation which support crewed mission phases. However, they also need to be put into a reduced use or dormant states to support uncrewed mission phases and then successfully and reliably returned to a nominal state to support crew. Multi-year demonstration of systems operation across this range of conditions are essential to mission success. Project overviews will include how the current activity supports the goal of multi-year demonstrations, planned follow-on activities, and what type of exploration mission elements are targeted for infusion. Technologies must be demonstrated and validated early enough to inform early exploration element milestone reviews (mission concept reviews, systems requirement reviews and no later than preliminary design reviews) so that supporting vehicle systems can also be matured. Consequently, for low technology readiness activities, it is important to also identify which mission elements they might infuse into and how they may offer potential operational, dormancy, or mass benefits. While low TRL technology timelines may not support initial mission needs, early infusion is still reasonable with sufficient testing to validate performance and reliability.

Life Support↗

DOE OSTI2023

Grating-Based Imaging-Scattering with Portable Neutron Generator

Company: Adelphi Technology, Inc. Title: Grating-Based Imaging-Scattering with Portable Neutron Generator PI: Dr. Jay Theodore Cremer, Jr. Topic: 26a Statement of the problem or situation that is being addressed. Successful plant growth depends upon an efficient and robust root system. The plant root is part of a larger system of water and microbial flows in the soil system. While much effort has been exerted to develop an imaging system for water, microbes, and roots, the problem is challenging, and no widely accepted imaging method currently exists. The optical solutions use a highly modified soil system. X-ray imaging methods are insensitive to the soft tissues in the presence of sand. Thermal neutron imaging has been often tested, but found inadequate, due to limited access and low image resolution. This project will develop a new strategy for neutron imaging of plant/soil systems. The project will allow long duration experiments in greenhouse environments and increase the image information content to the micron scale. General statement of how this problem is being addressed. Portable, rugged thermal and fast neutron sources are being developed where portable means a two-soldier team can carry the source and power unit to survey rough terrain for explosives. In the past decade, microfabrication of X-ray and thermal/cold neutron optics has opened a new imaging strategy. The standard transmission image is now supplemented with simultaneous acquisition of a phase contrast image and an image revealing scattering features. In materials science, the interferometric neutron scattering image has been used to detect early crack formation in stressed additive manufacturing test samples. The detection requires sensitivity to scattering features at the 1-micron scale. By addition of our proposed grating-optic to Adelphi Technology’s radiographic/tomographic imaging system, which is based on portable thermal neutron source, the resulting thermal neutron scatter image of the plant/soil system, will reveal details at 1-micron. Commercial Applications and Other Benefits Neutron interferometry imaging has greater penetration through large metal components compared to industrial X-ray imaging. The low-cost, large area optics developed for greenhouse applications, combined with the robust, portable neutron generator, can then be marketed as a system for inspection of additive manufactured components. In the aerospace industry, all freshly printed components are validated with X-ray CT. Scheduled maintenance again requires X-ray CT as the ability to predict aerospace component lifetime does not yet exist. Large aerospace components are only partially observed with X-ray imaging. Key Words Neutron radiography/tomography, grating interferometry, thermal neutron generator imaging, plant root and soil imaging, rhizosphere imaging, deployable neutron imaging systems Summary for Members of Congress A rugged, portable source of thermal neutrons is adapted for neutron interferometry imaging with the addition of low-cost, 3D printed optics. The first application of our proposed deployable, compact thermal neutron generator imaging system, using a grating optic, is plant root/soil science in greenhouse settings and agricultural laboratories.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

NASA NTRS2007

Optimization of Acoustic Pressure Measurements for Impedance Eduction

As noise constraints become increasingly stringent, there is continued emphasis on the development of improved acoustic liner concepts to reduce the amount of fan noise radiated to communities surrounding airports. As a result, multiple analytical prediction tools and experimental rigs have been developed by industry and academia to support liner evaluation. NASA Langley has also placed considerable effort in this area over the last three decades. More recently, a finite element code (Q3D) based on a quasi-3D implementation of the convected Helmholtz equation has been combined with measured data acquired in the Langley Grazing Incidence Tube (GIT) to reduce liner impedance in the presence of grazing flow. A new Curved Duct Test Rig (CDTR) has also been developed to allow evaluation of liners in the presence of grazing flow and controlled, higher-order modes, with straight and curved waveguides. Upgraded versions of each of these two test rigs are expected to begin operation by early 2008. The Grazing Flow Impedance Tube (GFIT) will replace the GIT, and additional capabilities will be incorporated into the CDTR. The current investigation uses the Q3D finite element code to evaluate some of the key capabilities of these two test rigs. First, the Q3D code is used to evaluate the microphone distribution designed for the GFIT. Liners ranging in length from 51 to 610 mm are investigated to determine whether acceptable impedance eduction can be achieved with microphones placed on the wall opposite the liner. This analysis indicates the best results are achieved for liner lengths of at least 203 mm. Next, the effects of moving this GFIT microphone array to the wall adjacent to the liner are evaluated, and acceptable results are achieved if the microphones are placed off the centerline. Finally, the code is used to investigate potential microphone placements in the CDTR rigid wall adjacent to the wall containing an acoustic liner, to determine if sufficient fidelity can be achieved with 32 microphones available for this purpose. Initial results indicate 32 microphones can provide acceptable measurements to support impedance eduction with this test rig.

Jones, M. G.↗

NASA NTRS2020

SISO Space Reference FOM - Tools and Testing

The Simulation Interoperability Standards Organization (SISO) Space Reference Federation Object Model (SpaceFOM) version 1.0 is nearing completion. Earlier papers have described the use of the High Level Architecture (HLA) in Space simulation as well as technical aspects of the SpaceFOM. This paper takes a look at different SpaceFOM tools and how they were used during the development and testing of the standard.The first organizations to develop SpaceFOM-compliant federates for SpaceFOM development and testing were NASA's Johnson Space Center (JSC), the University of Calabria (UNICAL), and Pitch Technologies.JSC is one of NASA's lead centers for human space flight. Much of the core distributed simulation technology development, specifically associated with the SpaceFOM, is done by the NASA Exploration Systems Simulations (NExSyS) team. One of NASA's principal simulation development tools is the Trick Simulation Environment. NASA's NExSyS team has been modifying and using Trick and TrickHLA to help develop and test the SpaceFOM.The System Modeling And Simulation Hub Laboratory (SMASH-Lab) at UNICAL has developed the Simulation Exploration Experience (SEE) HLA Starter kit, that has been used by most SEE teams involved in the distributed simulation of a Moon base. It is particularly useful for the development of federates that are compatible with the SpaceFOM. The HLA Starter Kit is a Java based tool that provides a well-structured framework to simplify the formulation, generation, and execution of SpaceFOM-compliant federates.Pitch Technologies, a company specializing in distributed simulation, is utilizing a number of their existing HLA tools to support development and testing of the SpaceFOM. In addition to the existing tools, Pitch has developed a few SpaceFOM specific federates: Space Master for managing the initialization, execution and pacing of any SpaceFOM federation; EarthEnvironment, a simple Root Reference Publisher; and Space Monitor, a graphical tool for monitoring reference frames and physical entities.Early testing of the SpaceFOM was carried out in the SEE university outreach program, initiated in SISO. Students were given a subset of the FOM, that was later extended. Sample federates were developed and frameworks were developed or adapted to the early FOM versions.As drafts of the standard matured, testing was performed using federates from government, industry, and academia. By mixing federates developed by different teams the standard could be tested with respect to functional correctness, robustness and clarity.These frameworks and federates have been useful when testing and verifying the design of the standard. In addition to this, they have since formed a starting point for developing SpaceFOM-compliant federations in several projects, for example for NASA, ESA as well as SEE.

Möller, Björn↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

12-kW Advanced Electric Propulsion System Hall Current Thruster Qualification and Production Status

The AEPS contract was awarded to AR in May of 2016 with the goal of developing a 12.5kW Hall Thruster System, including the Hall Current Thruster (HCT), Power Processor Unit (PPU) and Xenon Flow Controller (XFC). It was originally targeted to support the Asteroid Redirect Mission, which was cancelled early in the project. The project was subsequently restructured to support the Gateway PPE propulsion mission, with modified scope that consisted of the development, qualification and delivery of three 12kW flight thrusters. The PPU and XFC components were designed and development hardware fabricated with initial testing performed prior to being de-scoped from the contract. System level testing was performed by AR using these engineering components in early 2022 at the Aerospace Corporation’s EP-3 test facility.

Hall thruster↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Preliminary Findings of the Experimental Development Unit Cold Flow Test for a Generation Zero Nuclear Propulsion Engine

Nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP) technology will greatly benefit human travel to Mars by significantly shortening transit times, improving crew safety, and providing more mission flexibility than traditional chemical rockets. As part of DRACO follow-on work to develop, build, and fly a generation zero NTP engine, a full scale flight-like experimental design unit (EDU) reactor was constructed to collect sufficient on-ground performance data to characterize flow induced vibrations (FIV) of critical reactor structures/components, inform development of the engine and reactor control algorithm, and collect pressure drop and flow distribution data across the reactor. The fluid conditions for the test program were designed to achieve system responses equivalent to that of an operational engine through all phases of engine operation including reactor startup, mainstage operation, reactor shutdown, and reactor cooldown. Over 100 tests were executed, flowing either GN2 or GHe through the EDU at varying flow rates and pressures. This experiment provided early validation of flow behavior and vibration risks before nuclear testing, boosted critical subsystem TRLs, informed design iterations, and reduced future test costs. The steady-state flow parameters for the experiment were modeled in Ansys Thermal Desktop, allowing rapid tuning and experiment-informed updates to a flight-like test matrix. The EDU dynamic environment was characterized with accelerometers, strain gauges, and high-frequency pressure transducers all sampled at 20 kHz. While many narrow-band oscillations were identified, no significant FIV occurred; the reactor structural responses tend to be enveloped by typical launch vehicle ascent vibration environments (defined up to 2 kHz), although significant energy is also present at higher frequencies.

Flow Induced Vibration↗

DOE OSTI2013

Energy-Efficient and Comfortable Buildings through Multivariate Integrated Control (ECoMIC)

This project aims to develop an integrated control solution for enhanced energy efficiency and user comfort in commercial buildings. The developed technology is a zone-based control framework that minimizes energy usage while maintaining occupants’ visual and thermal comfort through control of electric lights, motorized venetian blinds and thermostats. The control framework is designed following a modular, scalable and flexible architecture to facilitate easy integration with exiting building management systems. The control framework contains two key algorithms: 1) the lighting load balancing algorithm and 2) the thermostat control algorithm. The lighting load balancing algorithm adopts a model-based closed-loop control approach to determine the optimal electric light and venetian blind settings. It is formulated into an optimization problem with minimizing lighting-related energy consumptions as the objective and delivering adequate task light and preventing daylight glare as the constraints. The thermostat control algorithm is based on a well-established thermal comfort model and formulated as a root-finding problem to dynamically determine the optimal thermostat setpoint for both energy savings and improved thermal comfort. To address building-wide scalability, a system architecture was developed for the zone-based control technology. Three levels of services are defined in the architecture: external services, facility level services and zone level services. The zone-level service includes the control algorithms described above as well as the corresponding interfaces, profiles, sensors and actuators to realize the zone controller. The facility level services connect to the zones through a backbone network, handle supervisory level information and controls, and thus facilitate building-wide scalability. The external services provide communication capability to entities outside of the building for grid interaction and remote access. Various aspects of the developed control technology were evaluated and verified through both simulations and testbed implementations. Simulations coupling a DOE medium office reference building in EnergyPlus building simulation software and a prototype controller in Matlab were performed. During summer time in a mixed-humid climate zone, the simulations revealed reductions of 27% and 42% in electric lighting load and cooling load, respectively, when compared to an advanced base case with daylight dimming and blinds automatically tilted to block direct sun. Two single-room testbeds were established. The testbed at Philips Lighting business building (Rosemont, IL) was designed for quantifying energy performance of integrated controls. This particular implementation achieved 40% and 79% savings on lighting and HVAC energy, respectively, compared to a relatively simple base case operated on predefined schedules. While the resulting energy savings was very encouraging, it should be noted that there may be several caveats associated with it. 1) The test was run during late spring and early summer, and the savings numbers might not be directly used to extrapolate the annual energy savings. 2) Due to the needs for separate control and metering of the small-scale demonstrator within a large building, the HVAC system, hence the corresponding savings, did not represent a typical energy code-compliant design. 3) The light level in the control case was regulated at a particular setpoint, which was lower than then the full-on light level in the base case, and the savings resulted from tuning down the light level to the setpoint was not attributable to the contribution of the developed technology. The testbed at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley, CA) specifically focused on glare control integration, and has demonstrated the feasibility and capability of the glare detection and prevention technique. While the short one-month test in this testbed provided a functional indication of the developed technology, and it would require at least a full solstice-to-solstice cycle to ruinously quantify the performance, which was not possible within the project timeframe. There are certain limitations inherited from the operational assumptions, which could potentially affect the effectiveness and applicability of the developed control technologies. The system takes a typical ceiling-mounting approach for the photosensor locations, and therefore, the control performance relies on proper commissioning or the built-in intelligence of the photosensor for pertinent task light level estimations. For spaces where daylight penetration diminishes significantly deeper into the zone, certain modification to the control algorithms is required to accommodate multiple lighting control subzones and the corresponding sensors for providing a more uniform light level across the entire zone. Integrated control of visual and thermal comfort requires the lighting control zone and thermal control zone to coincide with each other. In other words, the area illuminated by a lighting circuit needs to be the same area served by the thermostat. Thus, the original zoning will potentially constrain the applicability of this technology in retrofitting projects. This project demonstrated the technical feasibility of a zone-based integrated control technology. From the simulation results and testbed implementations, up to 60% lighting energy savings in daylit areas relative to a “no-controls” case can easily be achieved. A 20% reduction of whole building energy consumption is also attainable. In the aspect of occupant comfort, the testbed demonstrated the ability to maintain specified light level on the workplane while promptly mitigate daylight glare 90% of the time. The control system also managed to maintain the thermal environment at a comfortable level 90% of the time. The aspect of system scalability was guaranteed by the system architecture design, based on which the testbeds were instantiated. Analysis on the aspect of economic benefit has yielded an about 6-year payback time for a medium-sized building, including the installation of all hardware and software, such as motorized blinds and LED luminaires. The payback time can be significantly reduced if part of the hardware is already in place for retrofitting projects. It needs to be noted that since the payback analysis was partly based on the testbed performance results, it is constrained by the caveats associated with the testbed implementations. The main uncertainty lies in the contribution from the space conditioning energy savings as it was non-trivial to realistically configure a room-size HVAC system for directly extrapolating whole-building HVAC energy savings. It is recommended to further evaluate the developed technology at a larger scale, where the lighting and HVAC energy consumption can be realistically measured at the building level, to more rigorously quantify the performance potentials.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

NASA NTRS1979

Intercomparison of GEOS 3 tracking systems

Measurements and time biases of the GEOS 3 tracking systems in the Atlantic calibration area were determined in relation to the Goddard lasers. In collocation tests the lasers agreed with each other to about 10 cm. Early RAMLAS laser data contained an apparent time bias of 647 microsec. Later, in a laser collocation test, RAMLAS differed from MOBLAS 2 by +11.3 cm and -28 microsec. An overlooked correction reduced the -28 microsec to -8 microsec. The geoceivers initially had range rate biases of 3-6 m/s and constant time biases of several milliseconds. During the first month of GEOS 3 operations the range rate biases decreases monotonically by 2.5 + or - 1.0 m/s. The C band radar biases relative to the lasers were usually within several meters and several tenths of milliseconds. The unified S band system relative biases were usually within + or - 4 mm/s and + or - 0.1 ms. The average and scatter of the altimeter biases recovered on 18 laser reference arcs was - 5.3 + or - 0.6 m.

Berbert, J. H.↗

NASA NTRS2024

Overview of Integrated Random Vibration Testing of the NASA Orion Crew Survival Suit

The launch ascent and abort random vibration environments from NASA’s Orion spacecraft drove the need to test the NASA Orion Crew Survival Suit as an integrated system with exposure to the design levels. In order to properly characterize component responses, a series of integrated tests were designed to incorporate the interaction between a crew member, suit, seat, and the attenuation system. The first Development Test (2017) included human subjects, and was performed with early development seat and suit components, and low level inputs. It provided a baseline for frequency response and behavior of the integrated system. The next two tests, Development Test (2019) and Qualification Test (2020), used manikin surrogates to represent the crew member and increasing levels of component hardware fidelity in order to test to higher input levels. Testing was performed at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) and Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Vibration Labs and provided the input levels required to represent the ascent and abort vehicle profiles as well as recorded component response behavior from accelerometer instrumentation and high speed cameras. Inspection of the suit and related components showed that for all seat orientations, and input environments, no damage occurred. Additional pre and post-test checks confirmed the functionality of all suited hardware. Response data of the suited components generally showed heavy attenuation across most of the tested frequency range. Transmissibility plots showed some amplification of components at lower frequency ranges. Overall this series of integrated tests showed that 1) the use of surrogate manikins in the tests were adequate for representing crew in a vibration environment, 2) full vibration levels for ascent and abort were heavily attenuated in the suit components and were non-damaging, and 3) the suit and related components are qualified for the Orion random vibration environments.

Jeffrey D Suhey↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Overview of Integrated Random Vibration Testing of the NASA Orion Crew Survival Suit

The launch ascent and abort random vibration environments from NASA’s Orion spacecraft drove the need to test the NASA Orion Crew Survival Suit as an integrated system with exposure to the design levels. In order to properly characterize component responses, a series of integrated tests were designed to incorporate the interaction between a crew member, suit, seat, and the attenuation system. The first Development Test (2017) included human subjects, and was performed with early development seat and suit components, and low level inputs. It provided a baseline for frequency response and behavior of the integrated system. The next two tests, Development Test (2019) and Qualification Test (2020), used manikin surrogates to represent the crew member and increasing levels of component hardware fidelity in order to test to higher input levels. Testing was performed at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) and Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Vibration Labs and provided the input levels required to represent the ascent and abort vehicle profiles as well as recorded component response behavior from accelerometer instrumentation and high speed cameras. Inspection of the suit and related components showed that for all seat orientations, and input environments, no damage occurred. Additional pre and post-test checks confirmed the functionality of all suited hardware. Response data of the suited components generally showed heavy attenuation across most of the tested frequency range. Transmissibility plots showed some amplification of components at lower frequency ranges. Overall this series of integrated tests showed that 1) the use of surrogate manikins in the tests were adequate for representing crew in a vibration environment, 2) full vibration levels for ascent and abort were heavily attenuated in the suit components and were non-damaging, and 3) the suit and related components are qualified for the Orion random vibration environments.

Jeffrey Suhey↗

DOE OSTI2019

Fracture Tracer Injection Response to Pressure Perturbations at an Injection Well

The EGS Collab project constructed an approximately ten-meter scale field site where fracture stimulation and flow/transport models can be validated against controlled, in-situ experiments. The first multi-well experimental site was established at the 4850 level of the Stanford Underground Research Facility (SURF) in the Homestake Mine located in South Dakota. Hydraulic fractures were created at an injection well drilled sub-horizontal from the drift. A flow system was established in one set of fractures by injection water at approximately 400 ml/min between a set of packers 164 feet from the drift wall in the injection well through a hydraulically stimulated fracture. Injected water was recovered from five locations in 4 nearby wells. From the end of October to the middle of November of 2018, a series of fracture characterization tests were conducted using a series of 10 tracer tests (7 which used C-dot and chloride as conservative solute tracers) to assess the flow pathway in the stimulated fracture. The injected tracers were detected in three of the five water production locations where the total water recovery ranged from approximately 50 to 80% of the injected water depending on the day the test was being conducted. Analysis of a series of tracers during this two-week period suggest a large change in the flow fracture field occurred during this testing period. A comparison of the tracer breakthrough curves at the production well showed a marked decrease in the initial and peak concentration over time, whereas the OB well exhibited an increase in the initial and peak concentration arrival during this fracture characterization testing period. These changes are believed to be in response to a number of higher-pressure short-term injections at the injection well in early November (2nd to the 6th). Results of this testing suggest that the fracture flow pathways can be altered as a result of the pressure perturbations in the injection well on the integrity of adjacent monitoring wells. Results from the EGS Collab project will support the DOE Geothermal Technology Office FORGE and other EGS development efforts.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

NASA NTRS2018

Design Limit Loads and Verification Approach for the TESS Observatory

The Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS) is a NASA Explorer mission. The TESS Observatory is scheduled to launch on Falcon 9 in April 2018. This presentation covers the process used to define and update design limit loads for the observatory, instrument, and components throughout the life of the program. The limit loads that drove the need for a SoftRide isolation system are highlighted. The testing performed to qualify the observatory for launch loads at the instrument and observatory level is also detailed. In addition, exchanges with the launch vehicle provider in terms of loads predictions and hardware for test are discussed along with the associated issues encountered and lessons learned. The loads development and verification success on TESS was a team effort. Orbital ATK is the spacecraft provider, NASA GSFC provides project management and technical oversight, the instrument is managed by MIT Kavli Institute and the instrument cameras are built and tested by MIT Lincoln Laboratory. Since the instrument was designed in parallel with the spacecraft, the instrument design limit loads were developed in partnership with NASA and the instrument team. The three teams collaborated on a regular basis starting in the early design phase and continuing through observatory level testing.

Limit Loads↗

NASA NTRS1979

Solar array technology for solar electric propulsion missions

Development of 66 W/kg and 200 W/kg solar arrays for solar electric propulsion is discussed along with two basic concentrator solar array design concepts. Considerable testing was performed to demonstrate the availability and capability of the technology used for these arrays. To provide complete demonstration of 66 W/kg technology, a full-scale wing was built and tested and NASA decided to fly it as an experiment on one of the early Shuttle flights. Performance of the concentrator array system was demonstrated by model testing in a thermal-vacuum chamber.

Young, L. E.↗

NASA NTRS1997

Magnetic Test Performance Capabilities at the Goddard Space Flight Center as Applied to the Global Geospace Science Initiative

Goddard Space Flight Center's (GSFC) Spacecraft Magnetic Test Facility (SMTF) is a historic test facility that has set the standard for all subsequent magnetic test facilities. The SMTF was constructed in the early 1960's for the purpose of simulating geomagnetic and interplanetary magnetic fields. Additionally, the facility provides the capability for measuring spacecraft generated magnetic fields as well as calibrating magnetic attitude control systems and science magnetometers. The SMTF was designed for large, spacecraft level tests and is currently the second largest spherical coil system in the world. The SMTF is a three-axis Braunbek system composed of four coils on each of three orthogonal axes. The largest coils are 12.7 meters (41.6 feet) in diameter. The three-axis Braunbek configuration provides a highly uniform cancellation of the geomagnetic field over the central 1.8 meter (6 foot) diameter primary test volume. Cancellation of the local geomagnetic field is to within +/-0.2 nanotesla with a uniformity of up to 0.001% within the 1.8 meter (6 foot) diameter primary test volume. Artificial magnetic field vectors from 0-60,000 nanotesla can be generated along any axis with a 0.1 nanotesla resolution. Oscillating or rotating field vectors can also be produced about any axis with a frequency of up to 100 radians/second. Since becoming fully operational in July of 1967, the SMTF has been the site of numerous spacecraft magnetics tests. Spacecraft tested at the SMTF include: the Solar Maximum Mission (SMM), Magsat, LANDSAT-D, the Fast Aurora] Snapshot (FAST) Explorer and the Sub-millimeter-Wave-Astronomy Satellite (SWAS) among others. This paper describes the methodology and sequencing used for the Global Geospace Science (GGS) initiative magnetic testing program in the Goddard Space Flight Center's SMTF. The GGS initiative provides an exemplary model of a strict and comprehensive magnetic control program.

Mitchell, Darryl R.↗

NASA NTRS2024

Dual Glovebox Thermal Vacuum Chamber: Testing Capabilities for Spacesuit Arms and Gloves

The development of Extravehicular Activity (EVA) suits and hand mobility EVA tasks are complex, high risk, and difficult to test in a simulated space environment. During the early assembly of the International Space Station (ISS), the Crew and Thermal Systems Division (CTSD) at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) was tasked to design a chamber that could use two Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) arms and gloves in a simulated space environment versus testing with a full suit. The Dual Glovebox (DGB) Chamber was built and served to help develop EVA tools and operations to assist with Return to Flight for the Space Shuttle after the Columbia accident. With the recent development of the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) and new commercial suits through the Extravehicular Activities Services (xEVAS) contract, the DGB can support the need to do suit component testing at thermal extremes and EVA operations without the cost of full suit testing. The DGB can simulate realistic delta pressures, vacuum down to 5x10-4 Torr (0.066 Pa) with roughing and cryogenic pumps, and a wide range of temperatures achieved via a combination of Liquid Nitrogen (LN2), conditioned Gaseous Nitrogen (GN2), Infrared (IR) lamps, and heater cables. Recent developmental work has verified operational status of the chamber and expanded the capabilities of the DGB to include thermal contact testing of suit gloves through two temperature-controlled grab bars. This paper will discuss the history and capabilities of the DGB, and the chamber’s future role in the development of new spacesuit systems.

Extravehicular Activity (EVA)↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Dual Glovebox Thermal Vacuum Chamber: Testing Capabilities for Spacesuit Arms and Gloves

The development of Extravehicular Activity (EVA) suits and hand mobility EVA tasks are complex, high risk, and difficult to test in a simulated space environment. During the early assembly of the International Space Station (ISS), the Crew and Thermal Systems Division (CTSD) at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) was tasked to design a chamber that could use two Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) arms and gloves in a simulated space environment versus testing with a full suit. The Dual Glovebox (DGB) Chamber was built and served to help develop EVA tools and operations to assist with Return to Flight for the Space Shuttle after the Columbia accident. With the recent development of the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) and new commercial suits through the Extravehicular Activities Services (xEVAS) contract, the DGB can support the need to do suit component testing at thermal extremes and EVA operations without the cost of full suit testing. The DGB can simulate realistic delta pressures, vacuum down to 5x10-4 Torr (0.066 Pa) with roughing and cryogenic pumps, and a wide range of temperatures achieved via a combination of Liquid Nitrogen (LN2), conditioned Gaseous Nitrogen (GN2), Infrared (IR) lamps, and heater cables. Recent developmental work has verified operational status of the chamber and expanded the capabilities of the DGB to include thermal contact testing of suit gloves through two temperature-controlled grab bars. This paper will discuss the history and capabilities of the DGB, and the chamber’s future role in the development of new spacesuit systems.

Extravehicular Activity (EVA)↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Dual Glovebox Thermal Vacuum Chamber: Testing Capabilities for Spacesuit Arms and Gloves

The development of Extravehicular Activity (EVA) suits and hand mobility EVA tasks are complex, high risk, and difficult to test in a simulated space environment. During the early assembly of the International Space Station (ISS), the Crew and Thermal Systems Division (CTSD) at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) was tasked to design a chamber that could use two Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) arms and gloves in a simulated space environment versus testing with a full suit. The Dual Glovebox (DGB) Chamber was built and served to help develop EVA tools and operations to assist with Return to Flight for the Space Shuttle after the Columbia accident. With the recent development of the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) and new commercial suits through the Extravehicular Activities Services (xEVAS) contract, the DGB can support the need to do suit component testing at thermal extremes and EVA operations without the cost of full suit testing. The DGB can simulate realistic delta pressures, vacuum down to 5x10-4 Torr (0.066 Pa) with roughing and cryogenic pumps, and a wide range of temperatures achieved via a combination of Liquid Nitrogen (LN2), conditioned Gaseous Nitrogen (GN2), Infrared (IR) lamps, and heater cables. Recent developmental work has verified operational status of the chamber and expanded the capabilities of the DGB to include thermal contact testing of suit gloves through two temperature-controlled grab bars. This paper will discuss the history and capabilities of the DGB, and the chamber’s future role in the development of new spacesuit systems.

spacesuit arms↗