Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Arrays”

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 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1981

Low cost solar array project silicon materials task. Development of a process for high capacity arc heater production of silicon for solar arrays

The experimental verification system for the production of silicon via the arc heater-sodium reduction of SiCl4 was designed, fabricated, installed, and operated. Each of the attendant subsystems was checked out and operated to insure performance requirements. These subsystems included: the arc heaters/reactor, cooling water system, gas system, power system, Control & Instrumentation system, Na injection system, SiCl4 injection system, effluent disposal system and gas burnoff system. Prior to introducing the reactants (Na and SiCl4) to the arc heater/reactor, a series of gas only-power tests was conducted to establish the operating parameters of the three arc heaters of the system. Following the successful completion of the gas only-power tests and the readiness tests of the sodium and SiCl4 injection systems, a shakedown test of the complete experimental verification system was conducted.

Fey, M. G.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Array automated assembly task low cost silicon solar array project, phase 2

Analyses of solar cell and module process steps for throughput rate, cost effectiveness, and reproductibility are reported. In addition to the concentration on cell and module processing sequences, an investigation was made into the capability of using microwave energy in the diffusion, sintering, and thick film firing steps of cell processing. Although the entire process sequence was integrated, the steps are treated individually with test and experimental data, conclusions, and recommendations.

Olson, C.↗
NASA NTRS1995

High-voltage space-plasma interactions measured on the PASP Plus test arrays

The Photovoltaic Array Space Power Plus Diagnostics (PASP Plus) experiment was developed by the Air Force's Phillips Laboratory with support from NASA's Lewis Research Center. It was launched on the Advanced Photovoltaic and Electronics EXperiments (APEX) satellite on August 3, 1994 into a 70 degree inclination, 363 km by 2550 km elliptical orbit. This orbit allows the investigation of space plasma effects on high-voltage operation (leakage current at positive voltages and arcing at negative voltages) in the perigee region. PASP Plus is testing twelve solar arrays. There are four planar Si arrays: an old standard type (used as a reference), the large-cell Space Station Freedom (SSF) array, a thin 'APSA' array, and an amorphous Si array. Next are three GaAs on Ge planar arrays and three new material planar arrays, including InP and two multijunction types. Finally, there are two concentrator arrays: a reflective-focusing Mini-Cassegrainian and a Fresnel-lens focusing Mini-Dome. PASP Plus's diagnostic sensors include: Langmuir probe to measure plasma density, an electrostatic analyzer (ESA) to measure the 30 eV to 30 KeV electron/ion spectra and determine vehicle negative potential during positive biasing, and a transient pulse monitor (TPM) to characterize the arcs that occur during the negative biasing. Through positive biasing of its test arrays, PASP Plus investigated the snapover phenomenon, which took place over the range of +100 to +300 V. It was found that array configurations where the interconnects are shielded from the space plasma (i.e., the concentrators or arrays with 'wrap-through' connectors) have lower leakage current. The concentrators exhibited negligible leakage current over the whole range up to +500 V. In the case of two similar GaAs on Ge arrays, the one with 'wrap-through' connectors had lower leakage current than the one with conventional interconnects. Through negative biasing, PASP Plus investigated the arcing rates of its test arrays. The standard Si array, with its old construction (exposed rough-surface interconnects), arced significantly over a wide voltage and plasma-density range. The other arrays arced at very low rates, mostly at voltages greater than -350 V and plasma densities near or greater than 10(exp 5)/cm(exp -3). AS expected according to theory, arcing was more prevalent when array temperatures were cold (based on biasing in eclipse).

Guidice, Donald A.↗
NASA NTRS2002

SMEX-Lite Modular Solar Array Architecture

For the most part, Goddard solar arrays have been custom designs that are unique to each mission. The solar panel design has been frozen prior to issuing an RFP for their procurement. There has typically been 6-9 months between RFP release and contract award, followed by an additional 24 months for performance of the contract. For Small Explorer (SMEX) missions, with three years between mission definition and launch, this has been a significant problem. The SMEX solar panels have been sufficiently small that the contract performance period has been reduced to 12-15 months. The bulk of this time is used up in the final design definition and fabrication of flight solar cell assemblies. Even so, it has been virtually impossible to have the spacecraft design at a level of maturity sufficient to freeze the solar panel geometry and release the RFP in time to avoid schedule problems with integrating the solar panels to the spacecraft. With that in mind, the SMEX-Lite project team developed a modular architecture for the assembly of solar arrays to greatly reduce the cost and schedule associated with the development of a mission- specific solar array. In the modular architecture, solar cells are fabricated onto small substrate panels. This modular panel (approximately 8.5" x 17" in this case) becomes the building block for constructing solar arrays for multiple missions with varying power requirements and geometrical arrangements. The mechanical framework that holds these modules together as a solar array is the only mission-unique design, changing in size and shape as required for each mission. There are several advantages to this approach. First, the typical solar array development cycle requires a mission unique design, procurement, and qualification including a custom qualification panel. With the modular architecture, a single qualification of the SMEX-Lite modules and the associated mechanical framework in a typical configuration provided a qualification by similarity to multiple missions. It then becomes possible to procure solar array modules in advance of mission definition and respond quickly and inexpensively to a selected mission's unique requirements. The solar array modular architecture allows the procurement of solar array modules before the array geometry has been frozen. This reduces the effect of procurement lead-time on the mission integration and test flow by as much as 50%. Second, by spreading the non-recurring costs over multiple missions, the cost per unit area is also reduced. In the case of the SMEX-Lite procurement, this reduction was by about one third of the cost per unit area compared to previous SMEX mission-unique procurements. Third, the modular architecture greatly facilitates the infusion of new solar cell technologies into flight programs as these technologies become available. New solar cell technologies need only be fabricated onto a standard-sized module to be incorporated into the next available mission. The modular solar array can be flown in a mixed configuration with some new and some standard cell technologies. Since each module has its own wiring terminals, the array can be arranged as desired electrically with little impact to cost and schedule. The solar array modular architecture does impose some additional constraints on systems and subsystem engineers. First, they must work with discrete solar array modules rather than size the array to fit exactly within an available envelope. The array area is constrained to an integer multiple of the module area. Second, the modular design is optimized for space radiation and thermal environments not greatly different from a typical SMEX LEO environment. For example, a mission with a highly elliptical orbit (e.g., Polar, SMEX/FAST) would require thicker coverglasses to protect the solar cells from the more intense radiation environment.

Lyons, John↗
NASA NTRS2012

Downsampling Photodetector Array with Windowing

In a photon counting detector array, each pixel in the array produces an electrical pulse when an incident photon on that pixel is detected. Detection and demodulation of an optical communication signal that modulated the intensity of the optical signal requires counting the number of photon arrivals over a given interval. As the size of photon counting photodetector arrays increases, parallel processing of all the pixels exceeds the resources available in current application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) and gate array (GA) technology; the desire for a high fill factor in avalanche photodiode (APD) detector arrays also precludes this. Through the use of downsampling and windowing portions of the detector array, the processing is distributed between the ASIC and GA. This allows demodulation of the optical communication signal incident on a large photon counting detector array, as well as providing architecture amenable to algorithmic changes. The detector array readout ASIC functions as a parallel-to-serial converter, serializing the photodetector array output for subsequent processing. Additional downsampling functionality for each pixel is added to this ASIC. Due to the large number of pixels in the array, the readout time of the entire photodetector is greater than the time between photon arrivals; therefore, a downsampling pre-processing step is done in order to increase the time allowed for the readout to occur. Each pixel drives a small counter that is incremented at every detected photon arrival or, equivalently, the charge in a storage capacitor is incremented. At the end of a user-configurable counting period (calculated independently from the ASIC), the counters are sampled and cleared. This downsampled photon count information is then sent one counter word at a time to the GA. For a large array, processing even the downsampled pixel counts exceeds the capabilities of the GA. Windowing of the array, whereby several subsets of pixels are designated for processing, is used to further reduce the computational requirements. The grouping of the designated pixel frame as the photon count information is sent one word at a time to the GA, the aggregation of the pixels in a window can be achieved by selecting only the designated pixel counts from the serial stream of photon counts, thereby obviating the need to store the entire frame of pixel count in the gate array. The pixel count se quence from each window can then be processed, forming lower-rate pixel statistics for each window. By having this processing occur in the GA rather than in the ASIC, future changes to the processing algorithm can be readily implemented. The high-bandwidth requirements of a photon counting array combined with the properties of the optical modulation being detected by the array present a unique problem that has not been addressed by current CCD or CMOS sensor array solutions.

Patawaran, Ferze D.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Low-Cost Phased Array Antenna for Sounding Rockets, Missiles, and Expendable Launch Vehicles

A low-cost beamformer phased array antenna has been developed for expendable launch vehicles, rockets, and missiles. It utilizes a conformal array antenna of ring or individual radiators (design varies depending on application) that is designed to be fed by the recently developed hybrid electrical/mechanical (vendor-supplied) phased array beamformer. The combination of these new array antennas and the hybrid beamformer results in a conformal phased array antenna that has significantly higher gain than traditional omni antennas, and costs an order of magnitude or more less than traditional phased array designs. Existing omnidirectional antennas for sounding rockets, missiles, and expendable launch vehicles (ELVs) do not have sufficient gain to support the required communication data rates via the space network. Missiles and smaller ELVs are often stabilized in flight by a fast (i.e. 4 Hz) roll rate. This fast roll rate, combined with vehicle attitude changes, greatly increases the complexity of the high-gain antenna beam-tracking problem. Phased arrays for larger ELVs with roll control are prohibitively expensive. Prior techniques involved a traditional fully electronic phased array solution, combined with highly complex and very fast inertial measurement unit phased array beamformers. The functional operation of this phased array is substantially different from traditional phased arrays in that it uses a hybrid electrical/mechanical beamformer that creates the relative time delays for steering the antenna beam via a small physical movement of variable delay lines. This movement is controlled via an innovative antenna control unit that accesses an internal measurement unit for vehicle attitude information, computes a beam-pointing angle to the target, then points the beam via a stepper motor controller. The stepper motor on the beamformer controls the beamformer variable delay lines that apply the appropriate time delays to the individual array elements to properly steer the beam. The array of phased ring radiators is unique in that it provides improved gain for a small rocket or missile that uses spin stabilization for stability. The antenna pattern created is symmetric about the roll axis (like an omnidirectional wraparound), and is thus capable of providing continuous coverage that is compatible with very fast spinning rockets. For larger ELVs with roll control, a linear array of elements can be used for the 1D scanned beamformer and phased array, or a 2D scanned beamformer can be used with an NxN element array.

Mullinix, Daniel↗
NASA NTRS2014

Clearance Analysis of Node 3 Aft CBM to the Stowed FGB Solar Array

In early 2011, the ISS Vehicle Configuration Office began considering the relocation of the Permanent Multipurpose Module (PMM) to the aft facing Common Berthing Mechanism (CBM) on Node 3 to open a berthing location for visiting vehicles on the Node 1 nadir CBM. In this position, computer-aided design (CAD) models indicated that the aft end of the PMM would be only a few inches from the stowed Functional Cargo Block (FGB) port solar array. To validate the CAD model clearance analysis, in the late summer of 2011 the Image Science and Analysis Group (ISAG) was asked to determine the true geometric relationship between the on-orbit aft facing Node 3 CBM and the FGB port solar array. The desired measurements could be computed easily by photogrammetric analysis if current imagery of the ISS hardware were obtained. Beginning in the fall of 2011, ISAG used the Dynamic Onboard Ubiquitous Graphics (DOUG) program to design a way to acquire imagery of the aft face of Node 3, the aft end-cone of Node 1, the port side of pressurized mating adapter 1 (PMA1), and the port side of the FGB out to the tip of the port solar array using cameras on the Space Station Remote Manipulator System (SSRMS). This was complicated by the need to thread the SSRMS under the truss, past Node 3 and the Cupola, and into the space between the aft side of Node 3 and the FGB solar array to acquire more than 100 images from multiple positions. To minimize the number of SSRMS movements, the Special Purpose Dexterous Manipulator (SPDM) would be attached to the SSRMS. This would make it possible to park the SPDM in one position and acquire multiple images by changing the viewing orientation of the SPDM body cameras using the pan/tilt units on which the cameras are mounted. Using this implementation concept, ISAG identified four SSRMS/SPDM positions from which all of the needed imagery could be acquired. Based on a photogrammetric simulation, it was estimated that the location of the FGB solar array could be measured within an accuracy of about 1 in. in each axis relative to the ISS Analysis Coordinate System (ISSACS). In October 2011, a proposed image-acquisition plan was drafted by ISAG and released for review. The ISS Robotics flight control team (ROBO) proposed minor changes to SPDM positions 1 and 4 to meet ISS proximity requirements. The updated image acquisition plan and draft chit were presented to and approved by the Systems Working Group (SWG) November 18 and were sent to the Vehicle Configuration Board (VCB) in early December 2011. Working with ROBO on 3 successive days (February 21, 22, and 23), ISAG collected 161 images of the ISS. Approximately 40 images were collected from each of the four different SSRMS/SPDM positions, with each set mapping the region from the Node 3 end cone, across Node 1, along the forward port side portion of the FGB, and out the port side FGB solar arrays. From this imagery, the best 80 images were selected for use in the analysis. The images were radiometrically enhanced to improve color and contrast and loaded into the FotoG analysis software along with the camera parameters and control data, which consisted of the coordinates for 54 handrail attachment bolts on the aft face of Node 3, in the ISSACS coordinate system. The results of this analysis produced the measured coordinates of 116 points distributed across the face of the FGB solar array panels (see figure 3) along with propagated uncertainty estimates in each coordinate axis. These results were sent to the ISS Vehicle Configuration Office, which sent them to the Configuration Analysis Modeling and Mass Properties (CAMMP) team for comparison with the Russian-provided CAD model for the retracted FGB solar arrays. The CAMMP analysis unexpectedly showed that the measured location of the port FGB solar array was up to 41-in. further outboard than the design and was slightly twisted about its rotational axis. The unexpected comparison results produced some initial concern regarding the accuracy of the photogrammetric measurements. To verify the measured results, ISAG personnel conducted a second analysis using just the imagery of the solar arrays in an arbitrary coordinate system defined by the three corner points of the inboard-most panel, with the design distance between points A1 and A10 as the only scale. The new measurements agreed with the original results to within less than 1 in. RMS in each axis, confirming the original solar array measurements. ISAG produced a final report for the ISS Vehicle Configuration Office documenting an apparent anomaly in the retracted configuration of the port FGB solar arrays. A copy of the measurement report was translated and sent to the Russian Space Agency. During a Vehicle Integrated Performance and Resources (VIPeR) teleconference September 24, 2012, the Russians acknowledged receipt of a translated copy of the ISAG report. The Russian representative stated that the head of the solar array design team claimed that the measured configuration was impossible unless the structure was physically broken. The Russians acknowledged that they had no expertise in photogrammetry, so the analysis technique employed was a "black box" to them, and they did not know how to use the ISAG results. They asked for a single image in which the overextension of the port solar array could be obviously seen. On November 10, 2012, during a face-to-face meeting with their Russian counterparts at JSC, ISAG presented nadir-view imagery of the FGB acquired during Space Shuttle rendezvous. Using the known width of the pressurized portion of the FGB as a scale, this analysis clearly showed that the port FGB solar array was extended outboard further than the Russian design for the retracted solar array.

Liddle, Donn↗
DOE OSTI2022

Mooring System Cost Estimates for Wave Energy Farms in Shared Mooring Arrays

As wave energy converters (WECs) become more advanced and cost-efficient, so too must their mooring systems. A key question in the development plans for WECs is the cost of the mooring system, particularly for large wave farms. WEC devices deployed in a WEC farm array, where each device can be connected by shared mooring lines in various array layouts, have potential to reduce mooring system costs significantly. This paper presents the modeling and designing of mooring systems for large WEC arrays and the calculation of the cost of each mooring system to determine the change in cost as the number of WECs in a farm increases. A baseline mooring system for a single floating oscillating water column (OWC) WEC was developed for this analysis. The mooring system utilizes four anchored mooring lines connected to a square assembly of wire rope mooring lines, supported by four floating buoys, and attached to the floating WEC by four polyester rope mooring lines. This assembly, referred to as a floating cell, can be tiled to form various rectangular WEC arrays. The objective of this analysis is to determine how the mooring system cost changes as more WECs are added to an array layout, each with their own interconnected floating cell. To do this, complete mooring systems need to be designed for each WEC array layout. To narrow down the design space of a WEC array mooring system, a couple assumptions were made. It was assumed that the floating cell parameters of the baseline design were to stay constant across all floating cells in the WEC array. It was also assumed that the anchored mooring lines would be of the baseline configuration, a predominantly chain mooring line with a short section of polyester rope near the fairlead, and a drag-embedment anchor. These anchored lines were assumed to extend from the outer edges of the WEC array, inline with the headings of the wire rope mooring lines of the floating cells, or diagonal if extending from a corner of the WEC array. Full mooring systems were designed for 2xN and NxN WEC array layouts and efficiently simulated in the mooring dynamics simulation tool, MoorDyn, to ensure all dynamic constraints were met. The system costs were calculated and then refined by shortening unnecessary chain line lengths and reducing the chain diameters of the downstream anchored mooring lines. It was found that, in general, mooring system costs per WEC decrease when WECs are installed in an array. Compared to the baseline mooring system for a single WEC, the 2x3 mooring system array had the lowest mooring system cost per WEC, reducing the cost per WEC by 59%. The 3x3 and 4x4 array mooring systems also saw significant reductions in cost per WEC but had negligible cost savings between the two designs, primarily because the larger 4x4 mooring system requires larger chain diameters, which increases cost. These results provide an interesting glimpse into modeling, designing, and calculating the cost of mooring systems for large WEC arrays.

cost↗
NASA NTRS2011

Infrared-Bolometer Arrays with Reflective Backshorts

Integrated circuits that incorporate square arrays of superconducting-transition- edge bolometers with optically reflective backshorts are being developed for use in image sensors in the spectral range from far infrared to millimeter wavelengths. To maximize the optical efficiency (and, thus, sensitivity) of such a sensor at a specific wavelength, resonant optical structures are created by placing the backshorts at a quarter wavelength behind the bolometer plane. The bolometer and backshort arrays are fabricated separately, then integrated to form a single unit denoted a backshort-under-grid (BUG) bolometer array. In a subsequent fabrication step, the BUG bolometer array is connected, by use of single-sided indium bump bonding, to a readout device that comprises mostly a superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) multiplexer circuit. The resulting sensor unit comprising the BUG bolometer array and the readout device is operated at a temperature below 1 K. The concept of increasing optical efficiency by use of backshorts at a quarter wavelength behind the bolometers is not new. Instead, the novelty of the present development lies mainly in several features of the design of the BUG bolometer array and the fabrication sequence used to implement the design. Prior to joining with the backshort array, the bolometer array comprises, more specifically, a square grid of free-standing molybdenum/gold superconducting-transition-edge bolometer elements on a 1.4- m-thick top layer of silicon that is part of a silicon support frame made from a silicon-on-insulator wafer. The backshort array is fabricated separately as a frame structure that includes support beams and contains a correspond - ing grid of optically reflective patches on a single-crystal silicon substrate. The process used to fabricate the bolometer array includes standard patterning and etching steps that result in the formation of deep notches in the silicon support frame. These notches are designed to interlock with the support beams on the backshort-array structure to provide structural support and precise relative positioning. The backshort-array structure is inserted in the silicon support frame behind the bolometer array, and the notches in the frame serve to receive the support beams of the backshort-array structure and thus determine the distance between the backshort and bolometer planes. The depth of the notches and, thus, the distance between the backshort and bolometer planes, can be tailored to a value between 25 to 300 m adjusting only a few process steps. The backshort array is designed so as not to interfere with the placement of indium bumps for subsequent indium bump-bonding to the multiplexing readout circuitry

Miller, Timothy M.↗
DOE OSTI2026

FAD-Toolset (Floating Array Design Toolset) [SWR-26-056]

The Floating Array Design (FAD) Toolset is a collection of tools for modeling and designing arrays of floating offshore structures. It was originally designed for floating wind systems but has applicability for many offshore applications. A core part of the FAD Toolset is the floating array model, which serves as a high-level library for efficiently modeling a floating array, such as a floating wind array. It combines site condition information and a description of the floating array design, and contains functions for evaluating the array's behavior considering the site conditions. For example, it combines information about site soil conditions, mooring line loads, and an array's anchor characteristics to estimate the holding capacity of each anchor. The library works in conjunction with the tools RAFT, MoorPy, and FLORIS to model floating platforms, wind turbines, mooring systems, power cables, and array wakes respectively. Layered on top of the floating array model is a set of design tools that can be used for algorithmically adjusting or optimizing parts of the a floating array. Specific tools existing for mooring lines, shared mooring systems, dynamic power cables, static power cable routing, and overall array layout. These capabilities work with the design representation and evaluation functions in the floating array model, and they can be applied by users in various combinations to suit different purposes. In addition to standalone uses of the FAD Toolset, a coupling has been made with Ard, (https://github.com/NLRWindSystems/Ard) a sophisticated and flexible wind farm optimization tool. This coupling allows Ard to use certain mooring system capabilities from FAD to perform layout optimization of floating wind farms with Ard's more advanced layout optimization capabilities. The FAD Toolset works with the IEA Wind Task 49 Ontology (https://github.com/IEAWindTask49/Ontology), which provides a standardized format for describing floating wind farm sites and designs. See example use cases in our examples folder (https://github.com/NLRWindSystems/FAD-Toolset/blob/main/examples/README.md) For working with the library, it is important to understand the floating array model structure, which is described more here: https://github.com/NLRWindSystems/FAD-Toolset/blob/main/fad/README.md.

Sirkis, Leah [National Laboratory of the Rockies (↗
NASA NTRS1981

Wind loads on flat plate photovoltaic array fields

The results of an experimental analysis (boundary layer wind tunnel test) of the aerodynamic forces resulting from winds acting on flat plate photovoltaic arrays are presented. Local pressure coefficient distributions and normal force coefficients on the arrays are shown and compared to theoretical results. Parameters that were varied when determining the aerodynamic forces included tilt angle, array separation, ground clearance, protective wind barriers, and the effect of the wind velocity profile. Recommended design wind forces and pressures are presented, which envelop the test results for winds perpendicular to the array's longitudinal axis. This wind direction produces the maximum wind loads on the arrays except at the array edge where oblique winds produce larger edge pressure loads. The arrays located at the outer boundary of an array field have a protective influence on the interior arrays of the field. A significant decrease of the array wind loads were recorded in the wind tunnel test on array panels located behind a fence and/or interior to the array field compared to the arrays on the boundary and unprotected from the wind. The magnitude of this decrease was the same whether caused by a fence or upwind arrays.

Miller, R. D.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Kilopixel Pop-Up Bolometer Arrays for the Atacama Cosmology Telescope

The recently deployed Atacama Cosmology Telescope (ACT) anticipates first light on its kilopixel array of close-packed transition-edge-sensor bolometers in November of 2007. The instrument will represent a full implementation of the next-generation, large format arrays for millimeter wave astronomy that use superconducting electronics and detectors. Achieving the practical construction of such an array is a significant step toward producing advanced detector arrays for future SOFIA instruments. We review the design considerations for the detector array produced for the ACT instrument. The first light imager consists of 32 separately instrumented 32-channel pop-up bolometer arrays (to create a 32x32 filled array of mm-wave sensors). Each array is instrumented with a 32-channel bias resistor array, Nyquist filter array, and time-division SQUID multiplexer. Each component needed to be produced in relatively large quantities with suitable uniformity to meet tolerances for array operation. An optical design was chosen to maximize absorption at the focal plane while mitigating reflections and stray light. The pop-up geometry (previously implemented with semiconducting detectors and readout on the SHARC II and HAWC instruments) enabled straightforward interface of the superconducting bias and readout circuit with the 2D array of superconducting bolometers. The array construction program balanced fabrication challenges with assembly challenges to deliver the instrument in a timely fashion. We present some of the results of the array build and characterization of its performance.

Chervenak, J. A.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Acoustic Phased Array Quantification of Quiet Technology Demonstrator 3 Advanced Inlet Liner Noise Component

Acoustic phased array flyover noise measurements were acquired as part of the Boeing 737 MAX-7 NASA Advanced Inlet Liner segment of the Quiet Technology Demonstrator 3 (QTD3) flight test program. This paper reports on the processes used for separating and quantifying the engine inlet, exhaust and airframe noise source components and provides sample phased array-based comparisons of the component noise source levels associated with the inlet liner treatment configurations. Full scale flyover noise testing of NASA advanced inlet liners was conducted as part of the Quiet Technology Demonstrator 3 flight test program in July and August of 2018. Details on the inlet designs and testing are provided in the companion paper of Reference 1. The present paper provides supplemental details relating to the acoustic phased array portion of the analyses provided in Ref. 1. In brief, the test article was a Boeing 737MAX-7 aircraft with a modified right hand (starboard side) engine inlet, which consisted of either a production inlet liner, a NASA designed inlet liner or a simulated hard wall configuration (accomplished by applying speed tape over the inlet acoustic treatment areas). In all three configurations, the engine forward fan case acoustic panel was replaced with a unperforated (hardwall) panel. No other modifications to any other acoustic treatment areas were made. The left hand (port side) engine was a production engine and was flown at idle thrust for all measurements in order to isolate the effects of the inlet liners to the right hand engine. As described in Ref. 1, the NASA inlet treatment consists of laterally cut slots (cut perpendicular to the flow direction) which are designed to reduce excrescence drag while maintaining or exceeding the liner acoustic noise reduction capabilities. The NASA inlet liner consists of a Multi-Degree of Freedom (MDOF) design with two breathable septum layers inserted into each honeycomb cell [1]. The aircraft noise measurements were acquired for both takeoff (flaps 1 setting, gear up) and approach (flaps 30 gear up and gear down) configurations. The inlet and flight test configurations are summarized in Table 1. Table 1: Inlet Treatment and Flight Configurations Inlet Forward Fan Case Aircraft Production Hardwall Flaps 1, gear up; flaps 30 gear up; flaps 30 gear down NASA Hardwall Flaps 1, gear up; flaps 30 gear up; flaps 30 gear down Hardwall Hardwall Flaps 1, gear up; flaps 30 gear up; flaps 30 gear down III.Test Description and Hardware The flight testing was conducted at the Grant County airport in Moses Lake, WA, between 27 July and 6 August 2018. The noise measurement instrumentation included 8 flush dish microphones arranged in a noise certification configuration as well as an 840 microphone phased array. The flush dish microphones were used to quantify the levels and differences in levels between the various inlet treatments. The phased array was used to separate and quantify the narrowband (tonal) and broadband noise component levels from the engine inlet/exhaust and from the airframe. Phased array extraction of the broadband component was critical to this study because it allowed for the separation of the inlet component from the total airplane level noise even when it was significantly below the total level. Figure 1 provides an overview of the phased array microphone layout as well as a detailed image of an individual phased array microphone mounted in a plate holder (the microphone sensor is the dot in the center of the plate). The ground plane ensemble array microphones (referred to as “ensemble array” in this paper) were mounted in plates with “flower petal” edges designed to minimize edge scattering effects. Fig. 1 Flyover test microphone layout. The phased array configuration was the result of a progressive development of concepts originally implemented in Ref. 2 and refined over the following years, consisting namely of multiple multi-arm logarithmic spiral subarrays designed to cover overlapping frequency ranges and optimized for various aircraft emission angles. For the present case, the signals from all 840 microphones were acquired on a single system. The 840 microphones were parsed into 11 primary subarray sets spanning from smallest to largest aperture size and labeled accordingly as “a, b, …, k”, where “a” corresponds to the smallest fielded subarray and “k” corresponds to the largest aperture subarray. The apertures ranged from approximately 10 ft to 427 ft in size (in the flight direction) with the subarrays consisting of between 215 and 312 microphones. Figure 2 shows three such subarrays, k, h and a. As done in Ref. 2, microphones were shared between subarrays in order to reduce total channel count. Fig. 2 Sample subarray sizes (20° from overhead – refer to Figure 3a discussion). In addition to the above, each of the 11 primary subarray sets consisted of four subarrays optimized to provide near equivalent array spatial resolution in both the flight and lateral directions within 30 degrees of overhead (i.e., airplane directly above the center of the array), namely, at angles  of 0, ±10, ±20 and ±30 degrees relative to overhead where angle  is defined as shown in Figure 3a. This allowed for optimized aircraft noise measurements from 60 to 120 degree emission angle.6 An example of this pletharray design is shown in Figure 3b for the k subarray. When the aircraft is at overhead, the microphones indicated by the blue markers are used for beamforming. When the aircraft is at angles ±10 degrees from overhead, both the blue and red colored microphones are used, and so on for the ±20 and ±30 degree aircraft locations. See Ref. 3 for extensive details on pletharray design for aeroacoustic phased array testing. 6 In the discussions that follow, emission angle values are used. These are the angles at the time sound is emitted relative to the engine axis and are calculated based on flight path angle, body aircraft body angle with respect to the relative wind direction, and engine axis angle relative to aircraft body angle.

Brusniak, Leon↗
NASA NTRS1996

Torsional Buckling Tests of a Simulated Solar Array

Spacecraft solar arrays are typically large structures supported by long, thin deployable booms. As such, they may be particularly susceptible to abnormal structural behavior induced by mechanical and thermal loading. One example is the Hubble Space Telescope solar arrays which consist of two split tubes fit one inside the other called BiSTEMs. The original solar arrays on the Hubble Space Telescope were found to be severely twisted following deployment and later telemetry data showed the arrays were vibrating during daylight to night and night to daylight transition. The solar array twist however can force the BiSTEM booms to change in cross-section and cause tile solar arrays to react unpredictably to future loading. The solar arrays were redesigned to correct for tile vibration, however, upon redeployment they again twisted. To assess the influence of boom cross-sectional configuration, experiments were conducted on two types of booms, (1)booms with closed cross-sections, and (2) booms with open cross-sections. Both models were subjected to compressive loading and imposed tip deflections. An existing analytical model by Chung and Thornton was used to define the individual load ranges for each model solar array configuration. The load range for the model solar array using closed cross-section booms was 0-120 Newtons and 0-160 Newtons for the model solar array using open cross-section booms. The results indicate the model solar array with closed cross-section booms buckled only in flexure. However, the results of the experiment with open cross-section booms indicate the model solar array buckled only in torsion and with imposed tip deflections the cross section can degrade by rotation of the inner relative to the outer STEM. For tile Hubble Space Telescope solar arrays the results of these experiments indicate the twisting resulted from the initial mechanical loading of the open cross-section booms.

Thornton, E. A.↗
NASA NTRS1996

Monolithic Microwave Integrated Circuit (MMIC) Phased Array Demonstrated With ACTS

Monolithic Microwave Integrated Circuit (MMIC) arrays developed by the NASA Lewis Research Center and the Air Force Rome Laboratory were demonstrated in aeronautical terminals and in mobile or fixed Earth terminals linked with NASA's Advanced Communications Technology Satellite (ACTS). Four K/Ka-band experimental arrays were demonstrated between May 1994 and May 1995. Each array had GaAs MMIC devices at each radiating element for electronic beam steering and distributed power amplification. The 30-GHz transmit array used in uplinks to ACTS was developed by Lewis and Texas Instruments. The three 20-GHz receive arrays used in downlinks from ACTS were developed in cooperation with the Air Force Rome Laboratory, taking advantage of existing Air Force integrated-circuit, active-phased-array development contracts with the Boeing Company and Lockheed Martin Corporation. Four demonstrations, each related to an application of high interest to both commercial and Department of Defense organizations, were conducted. The location, type of link, and the data rate achieved for each of the applications is shown. In one demonstration-- an aeronautical terminal experiment called AERO-X--a duplex voice link between an aeronautical terminal on the Lewis Learjet and ACTS was achieved. Two others demonstrated duplex voice links (and in one case, interactive video links as well) between ACTS and an Army high-mobility, multipurpose wheeled vehicle (HMMWV, or "humvee"). In the fourth demonstration, the array was on a fixed mount and was electronically steered toward ACTS. Lewis served as project manager for all demonstrations and as overall system integrator. Lewis engineers developed the array system including a controller for open-loop tracking of ACTS during flight and HMMWV motion, as well as a laptop data display and recording system used in all demonstrations. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory supported the AERO-X program, providing elements of the ACTS Mobile Terminal. The successful performance of experimental, proof-of-concept MMIC K/Ka-band arrays developed with U.S. industry in field demonstrations with ACTS indicates that high density MMIC integration at 20 and 30 GHz is indeed feasible. The successful development and demonstration of the MMIC array systems was possible only because of significant intergovernmental and Government/industry cooperation and the high level of teamwork within Lewis. The results provide a strong incentive for continuing the focused development of MMIC-array technology for satellite communications applications, with emphasis on packaging and cost issues, and for continuing the planning and conducting of other appropriate demonstrations or experiments of phased-array technology with ACTS. Given the present pressures on reducing funding for research and development in Government and industry, the extent to which this can be continued in a cooperative manner will determine whether MMIC array technology will make the transition from the proof-of-concept level to the operational system level.

Source record↗