SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Reliable descriptions of the optical properties of clouds and aerosols are essential for studies of radiative transfer in the terrestrial atmosphere...Here we explore the utility of two approaches for deriving the single scattering optical properties of particles with sharp corners and large axial ratios.
It is proposed to develop a high-fidelity ground facility to carry out long-duration human exploration mission simulations. These would not be merely computer simulations - they would in fact comprise a series of actual missions that just happen to stay on earth. These missions would include all elements of an actual mission, using actual technologies that would be used for the real mission. These missions would also include such elements as extravehicular activities, robotic systems, telepresence and teleoperation, surface drilling technology-all using a simulated planetary landscape. A sequence of missions would be defined that get progressively longer and more robust, perhaps a series of five or six missions over a span of 10 to 15 years ranging in duration from 180 days up to 1000 days. This high-fidelity ground facility would operate hand-in-hand with a host of other terrestrial analog sites such as the Antarctic, Haughton Crater, and the Arizona desert. Of course, all of these analog mission simulations will be conducted here on earth in 1-g, and NASA will still need the Shuttle and ISS to carry out all the microgravity and hypogravity science experiments and technology validations. The proposed missions would have sufficient definition such that definitive requirements could be derived from them to serve as direction for all the program elements of the mission. Additionally, specific milestones would be established for the "launch" date of each mission so that R&D programs would have both good requirements and solid milestones from which to .build their implementation plans. Mission aspects that could not be directly incorporated into the ground facility would be simulated via software. New management techniques would be developed for evaluation in this ground test facility program. These new techniques would have embedded metrics which would allow them to be continuously evaluated and adjusted so that by the time the sequence of missions is completed, the best management techniques will have been developed, implemented, and validated. A trained cadre of managers experienced with a large, complex program would then be available.
No abstract available
Over the past few years interest in the development and use of small satellites has rapidly gained momentum with universities, commercial, and government organizations. In a few years we may see networked clusters of dozens or even hundreds of small, cheap, easily replaceable satellites working together in place of the large, expensive and difficult-to-replace satellites now in orbit. Standards based satellite buses and deployment mechanisms, such as the CubeSat and Poly Pico-satellite Orbital Deployer (P-POD), have stimulated growth in this area. The use of small satellites is also proving to be a cost effective capability in many areas traditionally dominated by large satellites, though many challenges remain. Currently many of these small satellites undergo very little testing prior to flight. As these small satellites move from technology demonstration and student projects toward more complex operational assets, it is expected that the standards for verification and validation will increase.
The technology development Project Plan covers an overview of the Project and planned project activities for FY14-16.
No abstract available
This high level presentation is designed to introduce the UAS (Unmanned Aircraft Systems) in NAS (National Airspace System) project to the Penn State community.
No abstract available
As spacecraft designs converge toward miniaturization, and with the volumetric and mass challenges placed on avionics, programs will continue to advance the state of the art in spacecraft system development with new challenges to reduce power, mass and volume.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
During design of the SDO Science and Inertial mode PID controllers, the decision was made to disable the integral torque whenever system stability was in question. Three different schemes were developed to determine when to disable or enable the integral torque, and a trade study was performed to determine which scheme to implement. The trade study compared complexity of the control logic, risk of not reenabling the integral gain in time to reject steady-state error, and the amount of integral torque space used. The first scheme calculated a simplified Routh criterion to determine when to disable the integral torque. The second scheme calculates the PD part of the torque and looked to see if that torque would cause actuator saturation. If so, only the PD torque is used. If not, the integral torque is added. Finally, the third scheme compares the attitude and rate errors to limits and disables the integral torque if either of the errors is greater than the limit. Based on the trade study results, the third scheme was selected. Once it was decided when to disable the integral torque, analysis was performed to determine how to disable the integral torque and whether or not to reset the integrator once the integral torque was reenabled. Three ways to disable the integral torque were investigated: zero the input into the integrator, which causes the integral part of the PID control torque to be held constant; zero the integral torque directly but allow the integrator to continue integrating; or zero the integral torque directly and reset the integrator on integral torque reactivation. The analysis looked at complexity of the control logic, slew time plus settling time between each calibration maneuver step, and ability to reject steady-state error. Based on the results of the analysis, the decision was made to zero the input into the integrator without resetting it. Throughout the analysis, a high fidelity simulation was used to test the various implementation methods.
The Human Exploration Science Office (KX) provides leadership for NASA's Imagery Integration (Integration 2) Team, an affiliation of experts in the use of engineering-class imagery intended to monitor the performance of launch vehicles and crewed spacecraft in flight. Typical engineering imagery assessments include studying and characterizing the liftoff and ascent debris environments; launch vehicle and propulsion element performance; in-flight activities; and entry, landing, and recovery operations. Integration 2 support has been provided not only for U.S. Government spaceflight (e.g., Space Shuttle, Ares I-X) but also for commercial launch providers, such as Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX) and Orbital Sciences Corporation, servicing the International Space Station. The NASA Integration 2 Team is composed of imagery integration specialists from JSC, the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), and the Kennedy Space Center (KSC), who have access to a vast pool of experience and capabilities related to program integration, deployment and management of imagery assets, imagery data management, and photogrammetric analysis. The Integration 2 team is currently providing integration services to commercial demonstration flights, Exploration Flight Test-1 (EFT-1), and the Space Launch System (SLS)-based Exploration Missions (EM)-1 and EM-2. EM-2 will be the first attempt to fly a piloted mission with the Orion spacecraft. The Integration 2 Team provides the customer (both commercial and Government) with access to a wide array of imagery options - ground-based, airborne, seaborne, or vehicle-based - that are available through the Government and commercial vendors. The team guides the customer in assembling the appropriate complement of imagery acquisition assets at the customer's facilities, minimizing costs associated with market research and the risk of purchasing inadequate assets. The NASA Integration 2 capability simplifies the process of securing one-of-a-kind imagery assets and skill sets, such as ground-based fixed and tracking cameras, crew-in the-loop imaging applications, and the integration of custom or commercial-off-the-shelf sensors onboard spacecraft. For spaceflight applications, the Integration 2 Team leverages modeling, analytical, and scientific resources along with decades of experience and lessons learned to assist the customer in optimizing engineering imagery acquisition and management schemes for any phase of flight - launch, ascent, on-orbit, descent, and landing. The Integration 2 Team guides the customer in using NASA's world-class imagery analysis teams, which specialize in overcoming inherent challenges associated with spaceflight imagery sets. Precision motion tracking, two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) photogrammetry, image stabilization, 3D modeling of imagery data, lighting assessment, and vehicle fiducial marking assessments are available. During a mission or test, the Integration 2 Team provides oversight of imagery operations to verify fulfillment of imagery requirements. The team oversees the collection, screening, and analysis of imagery to build a set of imagery findings. It integrates and corroborates the imagery findings with other mission data sets, generating executive summaries to support time-critical mission decisions.
The initial part of the study was begun with a combination of literature searches, World Wide Web searches, and contacts with individuals and companies who were known to members of our team to have an interest in topics that seemed to be related to our study. There is a long list of such topics, such as concurrent engineering, design for manufacture, life-cycle engineering, systems engineering, systems integration, systems design, design systems, integrated product and process approaches, enterprise integration, integrated product realization, and similar terms. These all capture, at least in part, the flavor of what we describe here as integrated design systems. An inhibiting factor in this inquiry was the absence of agreed terminology for the study of integrated design systems. It is common for the term to be applied to what are essentially augmented Computer-Aided Design (CAD) systems, which are integrated only to the extent that agreements have been reached to attach proprietary extensions to proprietary CAD programs. It is also common for some to use the term integrated design systems to mean a system that applies only, or mainly, to the design phase of a product life cycle. It is likewise common for many of the terms listed earlier to be used as synonyms for integrated design systems. We tried to avoid this ambiguity by adopting the definition of integrated design systems that is implied in the introductory notes that we provided to our contacts, cited earlier. We thus arrived at this definition: Integrated Design Systems refers to the integration of the different tools and processes that comprise the engineering, of complex systems. It takes a broad view of the engineering of systems, to include consideration of the entire product realization process and the product life cycle. An important aspect of integrated design systems is the extent to which they integrate existing, "islands of automation" into a comprehensive design and product realization environment. As the study progressed, we relied increasingly upon a networking approach to lead us to new information. The departure point for such searches often was a government-sponsored project or a company initiative. The advantage of this approach was that short conversations with knowledgeable persons would usually cut through confusion over differences of terminology, thereby somewhat reducing the search space of the study. Even so, it was not until late in our eight-month inquiry that we began to see signs of convergence of the search, in the sense that a number of the latest inquiries began to turn up references to earlier contacts. As suggested above, this convergence often occurred with respect to particular government or company projects.
The Habitat Demonstration Unit (HDU) is an experimental exploration habitat technology and architecture test platform designed for analog demonstration activities. The HDU previously served as a test bed for testing technologies and sub-systems in a terrestrial surface environment. in 2010 in the Pressurized Excursion Module (PEM) configuration. Due to the amount of work involved to make the HDU project successful, the HDU project has required a team to integrate a variety of contributions from NASA centers and outside collaborators The size of the team and number of systems involved With the HDU makes Integration a complicated process. However, because the HDU shell manufacturing is complete, the team has a head start on FY--11 integration activities and can focus on integrating upgrades to existing systems as well as integrating new additions. To complete the development of the FY-11 HDU from conception to rollout for operations in July 2011, a cohesive integration strategy has been developed to integrate the various systems of HDU and the payloads. The highlighted HDU work for FY-11 will focus on performing upgrades to the PEM configuration, adding the X-Hab as a second level, adding a new porch providing the astronauts a larger work area outside the HDU for EVA preparations, and adding a Hygiene module. Together these upgrades result in a prototype configuration of the Deep Space Habitat (DSH), an element under evaluation by NASA's Human Exploration Framework Team (HEFT) Scheduled activates include early fit-checks and the utilization of a Habitat avionics test bed prior to installation into HDU. A coordinated effort to utilize modeling and simulation systems has aided in design and integration concept development. Modeling tools have been effective in hardware systems layout, cable routing, sub-system interface length estimation and human factors analysis. Decision processes on integration and use of all new subsystems will be defined early in the project to maximize the efficiency of both integration and field operations. In addition a series of tailored design reviews are utilized to quickly define the systems and their integration into the DSH configuration. These processes are necessary to ensure activities, such as partially reversing integration of the X-Hab second story of the HDU and deploying and stowing the new work porch for transportation to the JSC Rock Yard and to the Arizona Black Point Lava Flow Site are performed with minimal or no complications. In addition, incremental test operations leading up to an Integrated systems test allows for an orderly systems test program. For FY-11 activities, the HDU DSH will act as a laboratory utilizing a new X-Hab inflatable second floor with crew habitation features. In addition to the day to day operations involving maintenance of the HDU and exploring the surrounding terrain, testing and optimizing the use of the new X-Hab, work porch, Hygiene Module, and other sub-system enhancements will be the focus of the FY-11 test objectives. The HDU team requires a successful integration strategy using a variety of tools and approaches to prepare the DSH for these test objectives. In a challenging environment where the prototyping influences the system design, as well as Vice versa, results of the HDU DSH field tests will influence future designs of habitat systems.
The desire and ability to fly Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) is of increasing urgency. The application of unmanned aircraft to perform national security, defense, scientific, and emergency management are driving the critical need for less restrictive access by UAS to the NAS. UAS represent a new capability that will provide a variety of services in the government (public) and commercial (civil) aviation sectors. The growth of this potential industry has not yet been realized due to the lack of a common understanding of what is required to safely operate UAS in the NAS. NASA's UAS Integration in the NAS Project is conducting research in the areas of Separation Assurance/Sense and Avoid Interoperability (SSI), Human Systems Integration (HSI), and Communication to support reducing the barriers of UAS access to the NAS. This research was broken into two research themes namely, UAS Integration and Test Infrastructure. UAS Integration focuses on airspace integration procedures and performance standards to enable UAS integration in the air transportation system, covering Sense and Avoid (SAA) performance standards, command and control performance standards, and human systems integration. The focus of the Test Infrastructure theme was to enable development and validation of airspace integration procedures and performance standards, including the execution of integrated test and evaluation. In support of the integrated test and evaluation efforts, the Project developed an adaptable, scalable, and schedulable relevant test environment incorporating live, virtual, and constructive elements capable of validating concepts and technologies for unmanned aircraft systems to safely operate in the NAS. To accomplish this task, the Project planned to conduct three integrated events: a Human-in-the-Loop simulation and two Flight Test series that integrated key concepts, technologies and/or procedures in a relevant air traffic environment. Each of the integrated events were built on the technical achievements, fidelity and complexity of previous simulations and tests, resulting in research findings that support the development of regulations governing the access of UAS into the NAS. The purpose of this document is to describe how well the system under test was representative