Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “ORION”

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.

At least 1,009 records · Page 56
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Comparison of Surface Pressure Fluctuations from Flight and Wind Tunnel Tests on the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle

Transonic and supersonic wind-tunnel test of scaled-models are used to predict the surface pressure fluctuations on aerospace vehicles. An outstanding question is how good are such tests? The present paper attempts to answer this question for the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle by comparing data from the Ascent Abort-2 (AA2) flight test with those measured in two different scaled-model wind tunnel tests (WTT) 51AS and 134AS. A sensor by sensor and a Mach by Mach comparisons of spectra of surface pressure fluctuations are presented for nominal ascent part of flight. Spectra measured over a large part of the vehicle surface were found to be dominated by the wake vortices shed from the four Abort Motor nozzles situated on the upper part of the Launch Abort System. It was found that the shapes of the scaled-up spectra from WTTs were very close to those measured in the flight, but the levels, for the most part, were found to be lower than the flight data. The highest differences were from the regions of complex flows where wakes from the adjacent nozzles interacted with the free-stream flow. There the WTT predicted levels were consistently 2dB to 6dB lower than the flight data, across all spectral bands. Another region of significant under-prediction was the local separated flow region at the Fillet-Ogive junction. The accuracy of the sharp spectral peaks from regions along a nozzle axis was found to be dependent on the fidelity of the model. The model in the 51AS WTT used a simplified contour, which resulted in a large under prediction of the spectral peak by 1dB to 10dB. A limited number of data from 134AS, where the model accurately captured all features of the nozzles of the flight vehicle, however; showed that the under prediction was lower: 1-2dB. The fluctuation spectra on the large protuberance of the Umbilical Cover was found to be reasonably well-predicted by 134AS WTT, which meticulously reproduced a scaled-down shape of this protuberance. Such information will help to determine the margins to be applied to wind-tunnel data to create flight environments.

MPCV↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Free-Flight CFD Simulations and Dynamic StabilityAnalysis of the Orion Crew Module

Dynamic stability analysis of the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) is performed us-ing the US3D flow solver and a plugin library to solve rigid-body dynamics, Free-Flight CFD(FF-CFD). Previous efforts investigated the free-flight behavior of higher speed, open-backaeroshell shapes. Three primary experimental sources are used to evaluate the predictivecapability of the FF-CFD solver in the low supersonic range (Mach≈1). First, the ballisticrange results obtained at the HFFAF facility at NASA Ames is used to verify the six degree-of-freedom (6-DoF) dynamic capability of the FF-CFD solver. Next, FF-CFD simulationsare preformed using restricted motion and the resultant trajectories are post-processed toobtain pitch damping coefficient as a function of angle-of-attack. The comparison of thepitch damping results obtained with one degree-of-freedom (1-DoF) FF-CFD compare wellwith experimental fits derived from ballistic range data. Finally, the atmospheric flight ca-pability of FF-CFD is compared to data from the Ascent Abort-2 (AA-2) flight experiment.Two simulations were performed using forced and forced-free flight to investigate surfacepressure predictive capability and free-flight aerodynamic performance through a varyingatmosphere at low speed (Mach 0.6-0.2). Surface pressure predicted with FF-CFD agreeswell with experimental trends, with slight over-prediction near the end of the trajectory.The total angle-of-attack for the free-flight portion agrees well with experimental data.

FFCFD↗