SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Air Safety”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 1,099 records · Page 61

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2024

Testing of Advanced Capabilities to Enable In-time Safety Management and Assurance for Future Flight Operations

In order to refine an initial Concept of Operations, explore Concepts of Use, and expose/validate requirements for future In-Time Aviation Safety Management Systems (IASMS), testing architectures were created, along with a set of capabilities and underlying information exchange protocols. These systems were conceived and developed based on hazards associated with two envisioned urban area flight domains: (1) highly autonomous small uncrewed aerial systems (sUAS) operating at low altitudes, and (2) highly autonomous air taxis. The initial scope of this development is described in [1]; this report provides an update, focusing on the subsequent developments and test activities. As stated in [1], it is important to note that there are many capabilities already in use by the industry (or soon to be in use) that will play critical roles in future IASMS designs. Those reported here were developed to address a gap in the current state-of-the-art regarding specific hazards/risks, and/or to allow for investigation of the interplay between and across hazard types — particularly regarding how overall safety risk can be reduced or managed effectively. Results of testing and development activities are organized by the operational phase wherein a particular capability would be employed (i.e., preflight, in-flight, and post-flight/off-line). Pre-flight: A set of capabilities were developed to help mitigate safety risk prior to flight (e.g., during flight and mission planning). Results of testing summarize (1) validation activities to raise the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and (2) evaluation activities where the capabilities were applied to flight/mission planning procedures and used by operators/pilots. For the latter, flight plans were automatically assessed, and operators/pilots were notified of hazardous flight segments so as to enable adjustment of the flight plan and re-evaluation, and/or to better inform go/no-go decisions. Capabilities addressed hazards associated with power consumption, third-party risk, wind, navigation system performance, radiofrequency interference, and proximity to geo-spatial threats (e.g., buildings, trees, and no-fly zones). In-flight: Flight experiments tested capabilities that detect and respond to hazards encountered during flight. In the first series, safety hazards were monitored and assessed onboard, and system-generated mitigation maneuvers were recorded (but not acted upon by the vehicle). In the second series, mitigation maneuver commands directed the aircraft in response to safety hazards (i.e., auto-mitigation). The sUAS used for testing is described in full, as is the test architecture, which included commercial avionics, research avionics, and onboard software designed to detect, assess, and respond to hazards. The onboard system was designed as a run-time assurance framework, consistent with [2] and supportive of both supervisory and automated modes. The primary functions included: real-time risk assessment (RTRA), auto-pilot monitoring, constraint monitoring, and contingency select/triggering. RTRA performs integrated risk assessment considering data from several hazard-related monitors (e.g., battery, motors, navigation, communications, population density, and loss-of-control). Post-flight/off-line: Data monitored and recorded during flights can enable IASMS capabilities that execute after flights have completed (or “off-line”). These include: (1) the ability to identify anomalies and trends that may only be observable when comparing data spanning a number of similar flights; (2) the ability to update and validate pre-flight and in-flight capabilities and any underlying models to improve their performance; (3) the ability to report anomalies/off-nominals that may indicate design changes or maintenance actions are needed; and (4) the ability for humans involved in operations to report safety-relevant observations to help in understanding the flight data and/or the operational context of a flight. Progress on three such capabilities is summarized; the first investigates anomaly detection given a limited set of flight logs and applies an approach previously used for space operations. The second explores what could be identified using a larger set of flight logs, including from web-based forums where flight logs are posted by sUAS autopilot users. The third creates a new means of collecting information on UAS incidents and accidents via the Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS).

sUAS↗

NASA NTRS1997

Alternative Perspectives on Risk

The goal of the commercial air transport system is to provide air transportation to the flying public at an acceptable cost with minimal risk. in an ideal situation these three goals would support each other. In fact, it is sometimes the case that the goals conflict: getting passengers to their destinations on time may conflict with fixing a minor mechanical malfunction that may or may not impact safety; flying a route that will avoid turbulence, thereby providing passengers with a more comfortable ride, may consume more fuel; managing traffic density may mean aircraft are delayed or must use an approach that will result in a long taxi to their gates, costing time and fuel. Various players in the system--pilots, dispatchers, controllers, as well as managers in the airline carriers and traffic management system--make decisions every day that involve trade-offs of benefits and costs. The prospect of revisions in the air traffic management system, with shifts in responsibilities from controllers to users, including airline operations center personnel and pilots, means that individuals may be performing either new jobs or old jobs under new guidance. It will be essential to know how the various players (a) perceive the risks and benefits associated with the decisions they will make under the old and new control structures, and (b) how much risk they are willing to accept in making decisions. Risk is here defined as the probability and magnitude of negative events (after Slovic, 1987). Of primary interest are risks associated with traffic, weather, and operational factors such as schedule, fuel consumption, and passenger service. Previous research has documented differences between groups in perceptions of risks associated with both everyday and aviation related situations. Risk perception varies as a function of familiarity with the situation, degree to which one is potentially affected by the risk, the level of control one has over the situation, and one's level of experience and responsibility in the situation. In our presentation we will consider several factors that may influence differences in risk perception, risk tolerance and risk management among the three major categories of participants in the aviation system (pilots, dispatchers, and controllers). Primary factors that may affect risk attitudes (the collective term we will use for the three components of risk) include: expertise or job-specific knowledge or training, personal involvement or vulnerability to consequences, goals, time horizon (imminence of consequences), span of control and type of control, and information or technology support. These will be considered in the context of five different types of risk (physical threat, economic, social, legal, and ethical). A study designed to study differences between pilots and controllers in their perceptions and responses to traffic risks under the present and a user-preferred control situation will be described. Future studies involving dispatchers' risk perceptions regarding various types of risk will be discussed.

Davison, Jeannie↗

NASA NTRS2015

Orion Launch Abort System Performance on Exploration Flight Test 1

This paper will present an overview of the flight test objectives and performance of the Orion Launch Abort System during Exploration Flight Test-1. Exploration Flight Test-1, the first flight test of the Orion spacecraft, was managed and led by the Orion prime contractor, Lockheed Martin, and launched atop a United Launch Alliance Delta IV Heavy rocket. This flight test was a two-orbit, high-apogee, high-energy entry, low-inclination test mission used to validate and test systems critical to crew safety. This test included the first flight test of the Launch Abort System preforming Orion nominal flight mission critical objectives. NASA is currently designing and testing the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). Orion will serve as NASA's new exploration vehicle to carry astronauts to deep space destinations and safely return them to earth. The Orion spacecraft is composed of four main elements: the Launch Abort System, the Crew Module, the Service Module, and the Spacecraft Adapter (Fig. 1). The Launch Abort System (LAS) provides two functions; during nominal launches, the LAS provides protection for the Crew Module from atmospheric loads and heating during first stage flight and during emergencies provides a reliable abort capability for aborts that occur within the atmosphere. The Orion Launch Abort System (LAS) consists of an Abort Motor to provide the abort separation from the Launch Vehicle, an Attitude Control Motor to provide attitude and rate control, and a Jettison Motor for crew module to LAS separation (Fig. 2). The jettison motor is used during a nominal launch to separate the LAS from the Launch Vehicle (LV) early in the flight of the second stage when it is no longer needed for aborts and at the end of an LAS abort sequence to enable deployment of the crew module's Landing Recovery System. The LAS also provides a Boost Protective Cover fairing that shields the crew module from debris and the aero-thermal environment during ascent. Although the Orion Program has tested a number of the critical systems of the Orion spacecraft on the ground, the launch environment cannot be replicated completely on Earth. A number of flight tests have been conducted and are planned to demonstrate the performance and enable certification of the Orion Spacecraft. Exploration Flight Test 1, the first flight test of the Orion spacecraft, was successfully flown on December 5, 2014 from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station's Space Launch Complex 37. Orion's first flight was a two-orbit, high-apogee, high-energy entry, low-inclination test mission used to validate and test systems critical to crew safety, such as heat shield performance, separation events, avionics and software performance, attitude control and guidance, parachute deployment and recovery operations. One of the key separation events tested during this flight was the nominal jettison of the LAS. Data from this flight will be used to verify the function of the jettison motor to separate the Launch Abort System from the crew module so it can continue on with the mission. The LAS nominal jettison event on Exploration Flight Test 1 occurred at six minutes and twenty seconds after liftoff (See Fig. 3). The abort motor and attitude control motors were inert for Exploration Flight Test 1, since the mission did not require abort capabilities. A suite of developmental flight instrumentation was included on the flight test to provide data on spacecraft subsystems and separation events. This paper will focus on the flight test objectives and performance of the LAS during ascent and nominal jettison. Selected LAS subsystem flight test data will be presented and discussed in the paper. Exploration Flight Test -1 will provide critical data that will enable engineering to improve Orion's design and reduce risk for the astronauts it will protect as NASA continues to move forward on its human journey to Mars. The lessons learned from Exploration Flight Test 1 and the other Flight Test Vehicles will certainly contribute to the vehicle architecture of a human-rated space launch vehicle.

McCauley, R.↗

DOE OSTI2023

Aeroelastic Analysis Using Deforming Cartesian Grids

Ongoing work in air-vehicle design illustrates the potential of advanced concepts to provide significant improvements in efficiency; but with their incorporation of lightweight flexible structures, such configurations may require active control systems to ensure reliability and safety. However, many contemporary analysis methods are inefficient for aeroelastic analysis and design of such configurations. This paper describes the development of a new approach that automates the geometry setup, mesh generation, and assembly of fluid–structural coupling interfaces to enable efficient aeroelastic and aeroservoelastic analysis of advanced concepts. The core elements for this approach are a cut-cell Cartesian grid-based computational fluid dynamics solver, a nonlinear beam element structural model, a conservative fluid–structural interface treatment, and the formulation and implementation of a new deforming grid capability within the cut-cell Cartesian grid solver. In this paper, emphasis is on this latter component with detailed description given of the mesh motion strategy, evaluation of fluxes and structural loads at the surface, and computation of geometrical properties such as cell volume, directed face areas, centroids, and motion-induced fluxes for deforming Cartesian grids required to advance the flow states. Aeroelastic simulations exercising the capability show favorable agreement with data and predictions in the literature for subsonic and supersonic applications.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

NASA NTRS1920

High Thermal Efficiency in Airplane Service

Described here is a method by which high average fuel economy has been achieved in aircraft engines. Details are given of the design of certain foreign engines that employ an unusual type of fuel-air ratio control in which the change in power produced by a mixture change is due almost entirely to the change in the power producing ability of the unit weight of the mixture. The safety and performance features of this type of control are explained.

Sparrow, S W↗

NASA NTRS2004

Runway Independent Aircraft Extremely Short Takeoff and Landing

This report Summarizes the work done is support of NASA/Ames Runway Independent Aircraft Research during the summer of 2003. This work centered on the tasks laid out by the Statement of Work, which was to: Identify and assess operational scenarios including airport air and ground operations and how RIA operations would interface; 2) Identify critical technologies and create a list of technologies that might be pushed to provide a quantum jump in operating economy, reliability, and safety should sufficient finding be available; 3) Create public domain powered high lift methodologies; and 4) Identify and assess vehicle concepts that provide innovative approaches to RIA operations. All these tasks were accomplished, with certain areas needing additional exploration in future grant work. Three designs were analyzed to provide strawman configurations for the RIA operations. All three aircraft carried 60 passengers, with a stage length of 1,000 nautical miles. They were capable of operating with a balanced field length of 2000 feet or less. Three different technology approaches were explored. The first, the Model 115, was a mid-wing USB design, developed as a near-term, low risk concept. The second aircraft, the EMAX, used a directed thrust system, was a far-term, high-risk approach. The third configuration was the Model 114, whose development began in summer 2002. In addition, further research was conducted on issues related to STOL operations, such as noise concerns, SNI operations, and other areas of interest.

Hall, David W.↗

NASA NTRS2004

Explanation Constraint Programming for Model-based Diagnosis of Engineered Systems

We can expect to see an increase in the deployment of unmanned air and land vehicles for autonomous exploration of space. In order to maintain autonomous control of such systems, it is essential to track the current state of the system. When the system includes safety-critical components, failures or faults in the system must be diagnosed as quickly as possible, and their effects compensated for so that control and safety are maintained under a variety of fault conditions. The Livingstone fault diagnosis and recovery kernel and its temporal extension L2 are examples of model-based reasoning engines for health management. Livingstone has been shown to be effective, it is in demand, and it is being further developed. It was part of the successful Remote Agent demonstration on Deep Space One in 1999. It has been and is being utilized by several projects involving groups from various NASA centers, including the In Situ Propellant Production (ISPP) simulation at Kennedy Space Center, the X-34 and X-37 experimental reusable launch vehicle missions, Techsat-21, and advanced life support projects. Model-based and consistency-based diagnostic systems like Livingstone work only with discrete and finite domain models. When quantitative and continuous behaviors are involved, these are abstracted to discrete form using some mapping. This mapping from the quantitative domain to the qualitative domain is sometimes very involved and requires the design of highly sophisticated and complex monitors. We propose a diagnostic methodology that deals directly with quantitative models and behaviors, thereby mitigating the need for these sophisticated mappings. Our work brings together ideas from model-based diagnosis systems like Livingstone and concurrent constraint programming concepts. The system uses explanations derived from the propagation of quantitative constraints to generate conflicts. Fast conflict generation algorithms are used to generate and maintain multiple candidates whose consistency can be tracked across multiple time steps.

Narasimhan, Sriram↗

NASA NTRS2004

Combustion Module-2 Achieved Scientific Success on Shuttle Mission STS-107

The familiar teardrop shape of a candle is caused by hot, spent air rising and cool fresh air flowing behind it. This type of airflow obscures many of the fundamental processes of combustion and is an impediment to our understanding and modeling of key combustion controls used for manufacturing, transportation, fire safety, and pollution. Conducting experiments in the microgravity environment onboard the space shuttles eliminates these impediments. NASA Glenn Research Center's Combustion Module-2 (CM-2) and its three experiments successfully flew on STS-107/Columbia in the SPACEHAB module and provided the answers for many research questions. However, this research also opened up new questions. The CM-2 facility was the largest and most complex pressurized system ever flown by NASA and was a precursor to the Glenn Fluids and Combustion Facility planned to fly on the International Space Station. CM-2 operated three combustion experiments: Laminar Soot Processes (LSP), Structure of Flame Balls at Low Lewis-Number (SOFBALL), and Water Mist Fire Suppression Experiment (Mist). Although Columbia's mission ended in tragedy with the loss of her crew and much data, most of the CM-2 results were sent to the ground team during the mission.

Over, Ann P.↗

NASA NTRS2014

Temporal Wind Pairs for Space Launch Vehicle Capability Assessment and Risk Mitigation

Space launch vehicles incorporate upper-level wind assessments to determine wind effects on the vehicle and for a commit to launch decision. These assessments make use of wind profiles measured hours prior to launch and may not represent the actual wind the vehicle will fly through. Uncertainty in the winds over the time period between the assessment and launch introduces uncertainty in assessment of vehicle controllability and structural integrity that must be accounted for to ensure launch safety. Temporal wind pairs are used in engineering development of allowances to mitigate uncertainty. Five sets of temporal wind pairs at various times (0.75, 1.5, 2, 3 and 4-hrs) at the United States Air Force Eastern Range and Western Range, as well as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Wallops Flight Facility are developed for use in upper-level wind assessments on vehicle performance. Historical databases are compiled from balloon-based and vertically pointing Doppler radar wind profiler systems. Various automated and manual quality control procedures are used to remove unacceptable profiles. Statistical analyses on the resultant wind pairs from each site are performed to determine if the observed extreme wind changes in the sample pairs are representative of extreme temporal wind change. Wind change samples in the Eastern Range and Western Range databases characterize extreme wind change. However, the small sample sizes in the Wallops Flight Facility databases yield low confidence that the sample population characterizes extreme wind change that could occur.

Decker, Ryan K.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Temporal Wind Pairs for Space Launch Vehicle Capability Assessment and Risk Mitigation

Decker, Ryan K.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Green Propellant Demonstration with Hydrazine Catalyst of F-16 Emergency Power Unit

Some space vehicle and aircraft Auxiliary Power Units (APUs) use hydrazine propellant for generating power. Hydrazine is a toxic, hazardous fuel which requires special safety equipment and processes for handling and loading. In recent years, there has been development of two green propellants that could enable their use in APU's: the Swedish LMP-103S and the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) AF-M315E. While there has been work on development of these propellants for thruster applications (Prisma and Green Propulsion Infusion Mission, respectively), there has been less focus on the application to power units. Beginning in 2012, an effort was started by the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) on the APU application. The MSFC plan was to demonstrate green propellants with residual Space Shuttle hardware. The principal investigator was able to acquire a Solid Rocket Booster gas generator and an Orbiter APU. Since these test assets were limited in number, an Air Force equivalent asset was identified: the F-16 Emergency Power Unit (EPU). In June 2013, two EPU's were acquired from retired aircraft located at Davis Monthan Air Force Base. A gas generator from one of these EPU's was taken out of an assembly and configured for testing with a version of the USAF propellant with a higher water content (AF-M315EM) to reduce decomposition temperatures. Testing in November 2014 has shown that this green propellant is reactive with the Hydrazine catalyst (Shell 405) generating 300 psi of pressure with the existing F-16 EPU configuration. This paper will highlight the results of MSFC testing in collaboration with AFRL.

Robinson, Joel W.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Analysis and Testing of a Composite Fuselage Shield for Open Rotor Engine Blade-Out Protection

The Federal Aviation Administration is working with the European Aviation Safety Agency to determine the certification base for proposed new engines that would not have a containment structure on large commercial aircraft. Equivalent safety to the current fleet is desired by the regulators, which means that loss of a single fan blade will not cause hazard to the Aircraft. The NASA Glenn Research Center and The Naval Air Warfare Center (NAWC), China Lake, collaborated with the FAA Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention Program to design and test lightweight composite shields for protection of the aircraft passengers and critical systems from a released blade that could impact the fuselage. LS-DYNA® was used to predict the thickness of the composite shield required to prevent blade penetration. In the test, two composite blades were pyrotechnically released from a running engine, each impacting a composite shield with a different thickness. The thinner shield was penetrated by the blade and the thicker shield prevented penetration. This was consistent with pre-test LS-DYNA predictions. This paper documents the analysis conducted to predict the required thickness of a composite shield, the live fire test from the full scale rig at NAWC China Lake and describes the damage to the shields as well as instrumentation results.

Composite↗

NASA NTRS2018

Airspace Technology Demonstration 3 (ATD-3) Multi-Flight Common Route (MFCR) Technology Transfer Document Summary Version 2.0

Airspace Technology Demonstration - 3 (ATD-3) is part of NASA's Airspace Operations and Safety Program (AOSP) - specifically, its Airspace Technology Demonstrations (ATD) Project. ATD-3 is a multi-year research and development effort which proposes to develop and demonstrate automation technologies and operating concepts that enable air navigation service providers and airspace users to continuously assess weather, winds, traffic, and other information to identify, evaluate, and implement workable opportunities for flight plan route corrections that can result in significant flight time and fuel savings in en-route airspace. In order to ensure that the products of this tech-transfer are relevant and useful, NASA has created strong partnerships with the FAA and key industry stakeholders. This summary document and accompanying technology artifacts satisfy the second of three Research Transition Products (RTPs) defined in the Applied Traffic Flow Management (ATFM) Research Transition Team (RTT) Plan. The original transfer, completed in December 2017, consisted of NASA's Multi-Flight Common Route (MFCR) research for efficient route corrections for en-route weather avoidance. This transfer updates the Concept of Operations document to a publicly-available NASA Technical Memorandum. The MFCR concept builds on the experience of the legacy Dynamic Weather Routes (DWR) and focuses on a better balance of potential savings with ATC acceptability, common route corrections options for multiple flights on similar routings, and better use of existing and/or modern automation for communication and coordination of route change options. All of these capabilities are expected to improve system performance significantly in terms of actual delay-reducing clearances issued to flights compared to that of the DWR tool and operating concept.

Tech transfer↗

NASA NTRS2018

Airspace Technology Demonstration 3 (ATD-3): Dynamic Routes for Arrivals in Weather (DRAW) Technology Transfer Document Summary Version 1.0

DRAW↗

NASA NTRS2019

Airspace Technology Demonstration 3 (ATD-3): Dynamic Routes for Arrivals in Weather (DRAW) Technology Transfer Document Summary Version 2.0

Airspace Technology Demonstration – 3 (ATD-3) is part of NASA’s Airspace Operations and Safety Program (AOSP) – specifically, its Airspace Technology Demonstrations (ATD) Project. ATD-3 is a multi-year research and development effort which proposes to develop and demonstrate automation technologies and operating concepts that enable air navigation service providers and airspace users to continuously assess weather, winds, traffic, and other information to identify, evaluate, and implement workable opportunities for flight plan route corrections that can result in significant flight time and fuel savings in en route airspace. In order to ensure that the products of this tech-transfer are relevant and useful, NASA has created strong partnerships with the FAA and key industry stakeholders. This summary document and accompanying technology artifacts satisfy the third Research Transition Product (RTP) defined in the Applied Traffic Flow Management (ATFM) Research Transition Team (RTT) Plan, which is Dynamic Routes for Arrivals in Weather (DRAW). This technology transfer consists of artifacts for DRAW Arrival Metering (AM) Operations delivered in June 2018, DRAW AM updates, and DRAW Extended Metering (XM) Operations. Blue highlighting indicates the new or modified deliverables. Some of the artifacts in this technology transfer have distribution restrictions that need to be followed. Distribution information is noted in each section. DRAW is a trajectory-based system that combines the legacy Dynamic Weather Routes (DWR) weather avoidance technology with an arrival-specific rerouting algorithm and arrival scheduler to improve traffic flows on weather-impacted arrival routes into major airports. First, DRAW identifies flights that could be rerouted to more efficient Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs) that may have previously been impacted by weather. Second, when weather is impacting the arrival routing, DRAW proposes simple arrival route corrections that enable aircraft to stay on their flight plan while avoiding weather. The DRAW system proposes reroutes early enough to allow Time Based Flow Management (TBFM) to make the necessary schedule adjustments. As a result, metering operations can be sustained longer and more consistently in the presence of weather because the arrival schedule accounts for the dynamic routing intent of arrival flights to deviate around weather. The first DRAW tech transfer in June 2018 focused on arrival metering operations with the DRAW algorithm implemented in the NASA Center TRACON Automation System (CTAS) automation software. This tech transfer delivery includes updates for DRAW implemented in FAA’s TBFM 4.7 automation software and preliminary research into DRAW for XM operations.

Isaacson, Douglas R.↗

NASA NTRS2019

A Multi-Physics Study on High-Specific Power Li-O2 Batteries for Electric Aircraft

Commercialization of lithium-air batteries faces many challenges, such as electrolyte decomposition, short cycle life, low energy and power density, etc. However, commercialization of Li-O2 batteries for aeronautics is much more challenging due to additional safety constraints on cyclability and performance (high specific power and specific energy). For this presentation, we will discuss inter-related aspects of physics-based modeling of a pack: cell and battery model calibration. In addition, we will evaluate and present optimal battery designs for high discharge current density, high discharge time, and low battery mass using simulation-based optimization.The Finite Element Model (FEM) used to simulate a Li-O2 cell is based on the work of Bevara [1]. The different aspects of the model are based on: porous electrode theory and concentrated electrolyte theory; quantum tunneling model for the resistance of conformal layer of discharge product (Li2O2) [1]; Butler-Volmer kinetics for electrochemical reaction; Fick's diffusion for oxygen transport; and an oxygen dissolution model is applied at the air/electrolyte interface [2]. The electrolyte properties such as ion conductivity, ion diffusion, oxygen diffusion, and mass density of the electrolyte were taken from Molecular Dynamics (MD) simulations [3]; while the other model parameters, which includes mass of cell components, were calibrated to match experiments at high discharge current densities. The cell mass includes the anode, cathode, separator, electrolyte, and other components (such as current collector). This calibrated model is used to perform parametric studies on cathode thickness, porosity, tortuosity, carbon particle size, electrolyte transport and material properties, partial pressure of oxygen, discharge time, and discharge current density to study optimal designs for high specific power and energy. References:1. Bevara, V. & Andrei, P. (2014), J. Electrochem. Soc. 161 (14), A2068-A2079.2.Mehta, M. & Andrei, P. (2015), J. Power Sources. 286, 299-308.3.Liyana-Arachchi, T.; Haskins, J.; Burke, C.; Diederichsen, K.; McCloskey, B.; & Lawson, J. (2018), J. Phys. Chem. B. 122 (36), 8548 - 8559.4.Choi, W.; Kikumoto, H.; Choudhary, R. & Ooka, R. (2018), Applied Energy, 209, 306-321.

Mehta, Mohit↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Preliminary Results from the Saffire VI Experiment

Preliminary results are presented for one test of the last flight of the Spacecraft Fire Experiment (Saffire VI) which was conducted on an orbiting Cygnus spacecraft. These experiments directly address the risks associated with our understanding of spacecraft fire behavior at practical length scales and geometries. The lack of this experimental data has forced spacecraft designers to base their designs and safety precautions on 1-g understanding of flame spread, flame self-extinguishment, fire detection, and suppression. The Saffire experiment was developed by an international team of investigators with the goal of addressing open issues in spacecraft fire safety. NASA’s Spacecraft Fire Safety Demonstration Project was formulated with the goal of conducting a series of large-scale experiments in spacecraft environments that represent practical spacecraft fires. These tests spanned 1.5 to 3.2 kW with free air volumes of 17 to 19 cubic meters. The final flight in the series of six experiments examined concurrent spread over large samples (all 41 cm wide) including a thin sheet of flammable fuel (cotton/fiberglass 50 cm long); 2-sided spread over 1 cm thick polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) (18 cm long); 1-sided spread over 0.5 cm thick (18 cm long); and Nomex fabric (7 cm long). Results are presented for the PMMA samples, the SIBAL sample, and the thin cotton samples from Saffire IV and V. The flame heat release is determined and compared to the overall temperature rise in the spacecraft and the change in the concentration of carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide in the spacecraft. Overall, the temperature and pressure rise in the spacecraft were found to be less significant than the increase in carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide.

fire↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

X-59 Air Data Probe Calibration Wind Tunnel Test

NASA's aeronautical innovators are working with Lockheed Martin to design and build a supersonic X-plane, the X-59, under the the Low Boom Flight Demonstrator (LBFD) Project, that produces a gentle thump rather than a loud sonic boom. The plane will be used to collect human response data over select U.S. communities. The data from the X-59 test flights will be provided to U.S. and international regulators to potentially allow supersonic flight over land, drastically reducing travel time within the U.S. and around the world. Two wind tunnel tests were conducted in the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) 8- by 6-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel to calibrate the nose probe for the X-59. The probe was successfully tested and calibrated at 19 Mach numbers between Mach 0.25 and Mach 1.7. Most data were collected using continuous roll angle sweeps at a set Mach number and pitch angle. About 725 high quality data runs were recorded during testing to be used in the calibration of the probe. A backup nose probe was also run through the same test matrix as the primary probe. The probe will be the primary instrument for the flight test of the X-59 for determining angle of attack, angle of sideslip, airspeed, and pressure altitude of the aircraft in flight. Knowing the aircraft's speed and attitude is critical for flight safety and is also critical data for the Sonic Boom mission. Areas of interest for the test were sea level takeoff and landing at Mach 0.2, subsonic cruise at Mach 0.9, and supersonic cruise at Mach 1.4. During Phase I flight testing, the air data nose probe and air data system as a whole will be further calibrated in flight to account for additional installed effects of the airframe on the air data system.

X-59↗