Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Integrated Operations”

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

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

At least 1,279 records · Page 71
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2024

Terrestrial Proving Ground Capabilities Needed for Lunar In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) & Construction Concepts of Operation

Incorporating any new technology or system into a human exploration mission or architecture requires development well in advance of the mission to eliminate technology, cost, and schedule risk concerns. It is often stated that technologies need to be at a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of 6, i.e. ‘system/subsystem model or prototype demonstration in a relevant environment (ground or space)’, by Authority To Proceed (ATP) or by the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) for the mission at the latest. There are two game changing capabilities for sustained human exploration of space that can have a significant effect on the overall exploration architecture and the technologies and systems included in the architecture. The first game changing capability, known as In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU), involves the search for, acquisition, and processing of resources on the Moon and Mars into mission consumables and usable products, and the second is the ability to utilize space resources in the construction of roads, structures, and surface infrastructure. ISRU and surface construction capabilities have the potential to greatly reduce the cost and risk of human exploration while enabling sustained lunar surface and commercial operations. However, ISRU and surface construction systems are complex and must operate in extremely harsh environments, with abrasive regolith and pervasive dust, for long-periods of time, with potentially limited opportunities for maintenance and repair by humans. The complexity of these capabilities and operations also means that there are a limited number of companies that can design, build, and operate end-to-end systems on their own. The majority of the technologies being developed for these systems are by small companies and at the component or subsystem level. With the overarching strategy of the United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) to enable industry to implement ISRU and surface infrastructure for Artemis and space commercialization, it is therefore important to establish processes and capabilities to promote and foster collaborations among large and small companies involved in ISRU and surface infrastructure development. For ISRU and infrastructure systems and capabilities to be used in Artemis missions and future commercial lunar surface operations, a coordinated framework with virtual/physical integration and testing locations, or ‘Proving Grounds’, needs to be established and operated on a regular basis and open to all. This paper will discuss the ISRU and surface construction near and long-term concepts of operations, and review operations and lessons-learned from the previous ISRU analog field tests. From this information, requirements and capabilities will be proposed to support and enable the integration and testing of ISRU and construction systems with industry, academia, and international agencies, as well as what facilities and organizations could help establish these Proving Grounds.

ISRU↗
NASA NTRS2014

Performance of a Supersonic Over-Wing Inlet with Application to a Low-Sonic-Boom Aircraft

Development of commercial supersonic aircraft has been hindered by many related factors including fuel-efficiency, economics, and sonic-boom signatures that have prevented over-land flight. Materials, propulsion, and flight control technologies have developed to the point where, if over-land flight were made possible, a commercial supersonic transport could be economically viable. Computational fluid dynamics, and modern optimization techniques enable designers to reduce the boom signature of candidate aircraft configurations to acceptable levels. However, propulsion systems must be carefully integrated with these low-boom configurations in order that the signatures remain acceptable. One technique to minimize the downward propagation of waves is to mount the propulsion systems above the wing, such that the wing provides shielding from shock waves generated by the inlet and nacelle. This topmounted approach introduces a number of issues with inlet design and performance especially with the highly-swept wing configurations common to low-boom designs. A 1.79%-scale aircraft model was built and tested at the NASA Glenn Research Center's 8-by 6-Foot Supersonic Wind Tunnel (8x6 SWT) to validate the configuration's sonic boom signature. In order to evaluate performance of the top-mounted inlets, the starboard flow-through nacelle on the aerodynamic model was replaced by a 2.3%-scale operational inlet model. This integrated configuration was tested at the 8x6 SWT from Mach 0.25 to 1.8 over a wide range of angles-of-attack and yaw. The inlet was also tested in an isolated configuration over a smaller range of angles-of-attack and yaw. A number of boundary-layer bleed configurations were investigated and found to provide a substantial positive impact on pressure recovery and distortion. Installed inlet performance in terms of mass capture, pressure recovery, and distortion over the Mach number range at the design angle-of-attack of 4-degrees is presented herein and compared to that at 0- degrees, as well as the isolated inlet configuration to highlight installation effects. Performance of the installed inlet fell below that of the isolated inlet at Mach numbers of 1.4 and greater. The installed inlet demonstrated adequate operability over the expected range of angles-of-attack and yaw, but did exhibit definite angle-ofattack and yaw limits at supersonic conditions. At each supersonic flight Mach number, performance parameters near zero yaw angle were relatively insensitive to yaw, but in general the yaw angle yielding best performance was non-zero and varied with angle-of-attack. Performance of the installed inlet is also presented as functions of angle-of-attack and yaw to highlight these effects. Distortion at the aerodynamic interface plane ranged between 10 and 25% at the inlet critical points over the range of flight Mach numbers tested and did not decrease significantly for the isolated inlet. Although these distortion levels would be considered high for operation with a turbine engine, the over-wing installation is likely not as significant a contributor as the low test Reynolds number. This is demonstrated by comparing CFD analysis of the isolated inlet at test scale with that at intermediate and full scales.

Performance↗
NASA NTRS2014

A Compact Two-Stage 120 W GaN High Power Amplifier for SweepSAR Radar Systems

This work presents the design and measured results of a fully integrated switched power two-stage GaN HEMT high-power amplifier (HPA) achieving 60% power-added efficiency at over 120Woutput power. This high-efficiency GaN HEMT HPA is an enabling technology for L-band SweepSAR interferometric instruments that enable frequent repeat intervals and high-resolution imagery. The L-band HPA was designed using space-qualified state-of-the-art GaN HEMT technology. The amplifier exhibits over 34 dB of power gain at 51 dBm of output power across an 80 MHz bandwidth. The HPA is divided into two stages, an 8 W driver stage and 120 W output stage. The amplifier is designed for pulsed operation, with a high-speed DC drain switch operating at the pulsed-repetition interval and settles within 200 ns. In addition to the electrical design, a thermally optimized package was designed, that allows for direct thermal radiation to maintain low-junction temperatures for the GaN parts maximizing long-term reliability. Lastly, real radar waveforms are characterized and analysis of amplitude and phase stability over temperature demonstrate ultra-stable operation over temperature using integrated bias compensation circuitry allowing less than 0.2 dB amplitude variation and 2 deg phase variation over a 70 C range.

Thrivikraman, Tushar↗
NASA NTRS2003

Reducing the Risk of Human Space Missions with INTEGRITY

The INTEGRITY Program will design and operate a test bed facility to help prepare for future beyond-LEO missions. The purpose of INTEGRITY is to enable future missions by developing, testing, and demonstrating advanced human space systems. INTEGRITY will also implement and validate advanced management techniques including risk analysis and mitigation. One important way INTEGRITY will help enable future missions is by reducing their risk. A risk analysis of human space missions is important in defining the steps that INTEGRITY should take to mitigate risk. This paper describes how a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) of human space missions will help support the planning and development of INTEGRITY to maximize its benefits to future missions. PRA is a systematic methodology to decompose the system into subsystems and components, to quantify the failure risk as a function of the design elements and their corresponding probability of failure. PRA provides a quantitative estimate of the probability of failure of the system, including an assessment and display of the degree of uncertainty surrounding the probability. PRA provides a basis for understanding the impacts of decisions that affect safety, reliability, performance, and cost. Risks with both high probability and high impact are identified as top priority. The PRA of human missions beyond Earth orbit will help indicate how the risk of future human space missions can be reduced by integrating and testing systems in INTEGRITY.

Jones, Harry W.↗
NASA NTRS1999

International Space Station Multi-Element Integrated Test

The International Space Station offers a unique challenge for integrated testing since the entire station is not launched as an integrated vehicle. The ISS design evolved for over 10 years from the station Freedom program that was based on a "ship and shoot" approach. Ship and shoot assumed the program would accept the hardware for launch and integrate the vehicle on orbit without any ground element-to-element integrated testing. Element-to-Element powered-on integrated testing is needed to identify operational problems on the ground rather than once the hardware is on orbit. The industry is accustomed to testing an integrated vehicle and then verifying it is ready for its operational missions. These tests require ground element emulators to represent on-orbit elements. The ISS Multi-Element Integrated Tests (MEIT) are element-to-element integrated tests bringing together hardware representing several flights. The major purpose of these tests is: 1) Element-to-Element interface compatibility, 2) Systems end-to-end operability and functionality and 3) utilize on-orbit procedures with the crew and mission control center. Execution of these tests is critical since the hardware is available for only a limited period of time. Test configurations are defined which test specific interfaces or functionality. These tests develop operational confidence in the Element-to-Element interfaces and identify major problems on the ground to avoid on-orbit anomalies that could threaten mission success, element survivability or assembly activities. This paper addresses the MEIT process, configurations and lessons-learned from these tests.

Filler, Russell E.↗
NASA NTRS2015

SSI-ARC Flight Test 3 Data Review

The "Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Integration into the National Airspace System (NAS)" Project conducted flight test program, referred to as Flight Test 3, at Armstrong Flight Research Center from June - August 2015. Four flight test days were dedicated to the NASA Ames-developed Detect and Avoid (DAA) System referred to as Autoresolver. The encounter scenarios, which involved NASA's Ikhana UAS and a manned intruder aircraft, were designed to collect data on DAA system performance in real-world conditions and uncertainties with four different surveillance sensor systems. Resulting flight test data and analysis results will be used to evaluate the DAA system performance (e.g., trajectory prediction accuracy, threat detection) and to add fidelity to simulation models used to inform Minimum Operating Performance Standards (MOPS) for integrating UAS into routine NAS operations.

detect and avoid↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Current Test Capabilities of NASA Langley’s Arc-Heated Scramjet Test Facility

The Arc-Heated Scramjet Test Facility at NASA Langley Research Center has demonstrated itself repeatedly as a key contributor to fundamental hypersonic research and scramjet engine technology development in the Mach 4.7 to 8 range. Since its inception in the 1970’s, the facility has hosted numerous scramjet engine configurations that explored the performance and operability of airframe-integrated hydrogen-fueled scramjet flow path concepts, successfully maturing both analysis tools and design technique and methodology for hypersonic propulsion. Contributions to major programs include extensive tests of the hydrogen-fueled NASP and Hyper-X scramjet engines, and the hydrocarbon-fueled HIFiRE Flight 2 scramjet flow path, in addition to fundamental in-house research. The facility capabilities have expanded to include direct-connect flow path support, gaseous hydrocarbon fuels, dynamic trajectory simulation and extension of flight simulation down to Mach 2.2. The low-Mach upgrades include increased air flow rate and controls capability and two new low-Mach nozzles (Mach 2.2 and 3.5). The facility recently completed verification of the new operational range through successful envelope expansion tests with the Mach 2.2 nozzle. With these new modifications, the operating envelope for the facility is now Mach 2.2 – 8.0(+), with a demonstrated dynamic pressure simulation of 2000 psf at the low end, and margin available for even more. Lastly, a continuous run time of over 5 minutes has been demonstrated, indicating that run time is limited only by test hardware or back-pressure requirements. This paper will provide a detailed description of these previously unreported upgrades and expanded simulation capabilities.

Hypersonic↗
NASA NTRS2004

Propulsion Options for the LISA Mission

The LISA mission is a constellation of three spacecraft operating at 1 AU from the Sun in a position trailing the Earth. After launch, a propulsion module provides the AV necessary to reach this operational orbit, and separates from the spacecraft. A second propulsion system integrated with the spacecraft maintains the operational orbit and reduces nongravitational disturbances on the instruments. Both chemical and electrical propulsion systems were considered for the propulsion module, and this trade is presented to show the possible benefits of an EP system. Several options for the orbit maintenance and disturbance reduction system are also briefly discussed, along with several important requirements that suggest the use of a FEEP thruster system.

Cardiff, Eric H.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA POWER: Providing Analysis-Ready, Cloud-Optimized Data for AI /ML Training and Applications in Earth Science

As global demand for sustainable development grows, the integration of Earth Observation (EO) data into decision making frameworks has become a primary objective for the scientific community. The NASA Prediction of Worldwide Energy Resources (POWER) project serves as a bridge between NASA EO data and the specialized needs of the renewable energy, sustainable infrastructure and agroclimatology communities. In this poster presentation we will present an overview of POWER data products and services along with its use in diverse research to decision-making workflows. By providing over 40 years of high-resolution historical, hourly and daily solar and meteorological data, POWER transforms satellite observations and global model reanalysis into actionable, Analysis-Ready Dataset (ARD). Currently, the project delivers over 250 industry-friendly parameters to the users from different NASA datasets like CERES SYN1Deg, MERRA-2, and IMERG alongside downscaled CMIP6 climate model data, fulfilling over 16 million requests from 50,000 unique users monthly. To ensure data quality and traceability, these parameters are rigorously validated against the ground-based observations from the Baseline Surface Radiation Network (BSRN) and the Global Surface Summary of the Day (GSOD) – these results will be discussed in the presentation. A newly introduced web-based PaRameter Uncertainty ViEwer (PRUVE) tool will be presented that provides an online validation platform to the users that benchmarks satellite-based and assimilation data products against these surface measurements. To reduce technical barriers to data adoption, POWER data is accessible through RESTful APIs, ESRI ArcGIS Image Services, a web-based Data Access Viewer tool, allowing users to visualize, validate and apply the dataset. For efficient data delivery POWER data is cloud-optimized into Zarr datastore accessible through NASA managed Amazon S3 ensures high-performance allowing users to integrate EO directly into operational pipelines. These customized services will be presented. Use cases from application will be presented from the energy sector - such as for design of generation systems, performance monitoring of solar power plants, in infrastructure sector- optimizing building energy efficiency and thermal comfort, in agriculture – such as driving crop simulation and yield forecasting models to enable climate resilient farming. Furthermore, the shift toward machine learning (ML) in EO research that has positioned POWER as a key provider for training datasets which will be discussed. Use-cases will be presented to showcase how NASA data is enabling the development of predictive tools for climate variability and resource management. The poster will present POWER’s future plans including technology development to enhance data traceability and reproducibility and improving I/O performance to support the rapid integration of new EO products, ensuring that POWER remains a robust scalable backend for the evolving landscape of AI-driven Earth Science. Additionally, POWER is developing an AI Agent and an MCP-Server to enable industry AI-Agentic workflows.

Neha Khadka↗
NASA NTRS2021

Best Practices Identified Through the Completion of UAS Flight Demonstrations

After several years of research into Detect and Avoid (DAA) and Command and Control (C2) systems for Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) UAS Integration into the National Airspace System project initiated a focused two-year effort along with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and three industry partners to investigate remaining issues in the specification, test, certification and airspace integration to allow UAS operations in non-segregated airspace. The approach taken had the industry partners propose a flight demonstration approximating a commercial operation, while NASA helped, as needed, the partners through design and test phases and NASA observed interactions with the FAA. During this effort NASA collected best practices intended to be of value to similar UAS endeavors. These best practices can be divided into different sets, including practices that describe the relationship between business considerations to UAS design or describe several UAS development challenges. Another set includes best practices focused on navigating the UAS design and type certification processes. A third set includes best practices that relate to the design of the DAA system. Deploying DAA systems in this timeframe posed unique challenges. Commercial off-the-shelf DAA systems do not exist, necessitating custom development and, for two of the partners, the use of low-size, -weight, and -power (SWaP) sensors not completely specified for DAA. A fourth set of best practices relates to lost-link contingency planning. The final set of best practices relates to the design and testing of C2 systems and obtaining spectrum licenses. The UAS demonstrations were piloted remotely, and for all aspects of flight safety, a C2 system was required to communicate DAA and other UAS subsystem data to the remote pilot and to allow the pilot to issue commands to the vehicle. Throughout the course of this effort, the partners integrated prototype DAA and C2 systems into unmanned aircraft, tested those systems, and laid the groundwork for type certification programs that are expected to continue.

NASA↗
NASA NTRS2011

NASA Space Technology Draft Roadmap Area 13: Ground and Launch Systems Processing

This slide presentation reviews the technology development roadmap for the area of ground and launch systems processing. The scope of this technology area includes: (1) Assembly, integration, and processing of the launch vehicle, spacecraft, and payload hardware (2) Supply chain management (3) Transportation of hardware to the launch site (4) Transportation to and operations at the launch pad (5) Launch processing infrastructure and its ability to support future operations (6) Range, personnel, and facility safety capabilities (7) Launch and landing weather (8) Environmental impact mitigations for ground and launch operations (9) Launch control center operations and infrastructure (10) Mission integration and planning (11) Mission training for both ground and flight crew personnel (12) Mission control center operations and infrastructure (13) Telemetry and command processing and archiving (14) Recovery operations for flight crews, flight hardware, and returned samples. This technology roadmap also identifies ground, launch and mission technologies that will: (1) Dramatically transform future space operations, with significant improvement in life-cycle costs (2) Improve the quality of life on earth, while exploring in co-existence with the environment (3) Increase reliability and mission availability using low/zero maintenance materials and systems, comprehensive capabilities to ascertain and forecast system health/configuration, data integration, and the use of advanced/expert software systems (4) Enhance methods to assess safety and mission risk posture, which would allow for timely and better decision making. Several key technologies are identified, with a couple of slides devoted to one of these technologies (i.e., corrosion detection and prevention). Development of these technologies can enhance life on earth and have a major impact on how we can access space, eventually making routine commercial space access and improve building and manufacturing, and weather forecasting for example for the effect of these process improvements on our daily lives.

Clements, Greg↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Dynamic Anomaly Response and Integrated Analysis (DARIA): A Fault Investigation Toolset Supporting Earth-Independent Operations in Future Crewed Mars Missions

NASA's Moon to Mars Objectives outline a strategic vision for human spaceflight culminating in crewed missions to Mars. A critical component of this objective is the development of systems that are capable of being Earth-Independent Operated (EIO). A key aspect of EIO is the ability to rapidly detect, diagnose, and respond to anomalies in crew-supporting habitat and connected systems. To address this, the Dynamic Anomaly Response and Integrated Analysis (DARIA) architecture has been developed. DARIA incorporates a network of compact, wireless sensing devices called the System for Telemetry Amalgamation of Multimodal PrognosticS (STAMPS) for increased state awareness of EIO habitats. Able to perform on-the-fly data acquisition, STAMPS are connected to integrated anomaly data dashboards for crew visualization. DARIA is designed to seamlessly integrate into various off-world environments, including the International Space Station, Lunar Gateway, Artemis Base Camp, and future Mars habitats. By leveraging Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) hardware, the NASA Internet of Things (NASA IoT) framework, and EIO fault detection methods, DARIA provides a cost-effective and adaptable solution for anomaly detection and response in EIO habitats.

Diagnostics↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Optimization Approach to Support Science Decision Making for Lunar Surface Exploration

Introduction: Scientific exploration is one of the three pillars of NASA’s Moon2Mars architecture, with crew surface extra vehicular activities (EVA) serving a critical enabling function. Development of surface EVA operational planning and execution, specifically integrating science and flight control teams (FCT), is currently being explored through analog scenarios. This integration, exercised, for example, through the Joint EVA and Hu-man Surface Mobility Test Team (JETT), allows for science input on EVA activities in near real-time through a Science Evaluation Room (SER), or Arte-mis science backroom, which integrates with the broader FCT through the Science Officer. The SER works within the FCT to support dynamic EVA planning in response to changes in operational constraints as well as science opportunities and re-prioritization, increasing the mission science return and accelerating the accomplishment of the Moon2Mars science objectives. The SER works within the FCT to provide recommendations to traverse execution in near real-time. One challenge is the requirement to deliver SER inputs to the FCT on operationally relevant timelines. Failure to do so may result in suboptimal execution of science exploration EVAs or even loss of key science objectives. To close this gap, we present a network optimization tool to allow the SER to provide rapid input to the FCT in response to changes in operational constraints or science opportunities. Inputs are predicated on approved science objectives, and clear rationale must be provided to the FCT for any requested change. Accordingly, this tool incorporates the Science Traceability Matrix (STM), SER prioritization scheme, and station characterization and action planning with operational constraints such as duration, traverse speed, and distance to maximize science objectives based on SER priorities, consistent with FCT operational requirements. Method: As a proof of concept, we used an existing linear programing software package used to simulate optimal routes through cellular metabolism. We built a Demonstrative Model with three STM objectives and four stations on a region of the Moon. The objectives were given an arbitrary prioritization and mapped to the stations through four possible crew actions. (Figs. 1 and 2). This station to STM mapping is consistent with the method used by the JETT5 Science Team to develop analog surface EVA science planning. We used a grid system with the landing site at the origin and the four stations placed across the positive x,y quadrant. Actions were assigned to each station and the accomplishment of those actions resulted in a numerical “reward” based on the ability of that action to achieve science objectives. The aggregate reward from each individual STM objective contributes to a global score (Science Yield), weighted by its priority. Operational constraints included a requirement to start and end at the landing site, 5 minutes each for initial station characterization and “clean up,” and variable total EVA time, traverse rate (fixed to 0.5 meters per second in our example), and time to perform each action (10, 5, 7, and 15 min for actions 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively). Additional constraints and variables will be added in the future (e.g., sample mass, number of stations, traverse route constraints, illumination). Optimization. We converted the connections (arcs) between these stations (nodes) into a mixed integer linear programming optimization problem (arcs = constraints, nodes = variables) with the objective to maximize Science Yield. For any action, the Science Yield is equal to the relevance of that action to an STM objective [3, 2, and 1 point(s) for High, Med., and Low relevance, respectively], multiplied by the STM Objective Priority [3, 2, and 1 point(s) for High, Med., and Low priority, respectively]. This resulted in a model that computes the optimal station and action combination to maximize the Science Yield. These weightings can be adjusted by the SER as desired. Results: We explored three test cases for the Demonstrative Model. First, we set the maximum EVA duration to 120 minutes and computed the optimal route (Fig. 3A). The model suggested per-forming Actions 1 and 2 at Station P01, followed by Actions 1 and 2 at Station P02, and finally Actions 1 and 3 at Station P04 before returning to the Landing Site. Second, we adjusted the STM Objective Priori-ty order and computed the new optimal route (Fig. 3B). Under this situation, the model suggested per-forming all Actions at Station P02 followed by all Actions at Station P03. The previous test cases were relevant to SER planning activities. Next, we explored providing mid-EVA replanning input to the FCT. Scenario: While executing the Route in Fig. 3A the crew finishes at Station P01 and FCT decides that the EVA needs to finish in 45 minutes back at the Landing Site. FCT asks SER to recommend changes to the plan to accommodate this operation-al change. Using the model and incorporating these new constraints (start at Station P01, max. time of 45 min), the model suggested performing Actions 2 and 4 at Station P03 (Fig. 4), requiring 41 minutes to complete and return to the Landing Site. Interestingly, Station 3 was not part of the original route. Using the model, we determined the EVA would need 66 minutes, instead of 45, in order for the original Station P04 to yield a larger Science Yield than Station P03. The parametrization and simulation was per-formed in less than a minute, demonstrating the operational relevance of the approach. Future Efforts: The results from the Demonstrative Model suggest this tool can accelerate SER decision making on operationally relevant timelines. Use in analog activities, such as JETT5 or follow-ons, which have over a dozen stations for a crew to explore and over a dozen actions per station, will provide needed validation of the utility of this tool for planning EVAs, replanning mid-EVA, or planning follow-on EVAs based on previous results. Further integration with FCT execution monitoring tools may provide additional efficiency gains, al-lowing rapid and iterative exploration of operation-al and science decision space by the FCT and SER.

Science Operations↗
NASA NTRS1993

Life cycle cost modeling of conceptual space vehicles

This paper documents progress to date by the University of Dayton on the development of a life cycle cost model for use during the conceptual design of new launch vehicles and spacecraft. This research is being conducted under NASA Research Grant NAG-1-1327. This research effort changes the focus from that of the first two years in which a reliability and maintainability model was developed to the initial development of a life cycle cost model. Cost categories are initially patterned after NASA's three axis work breakdown structure consisting of a configuration axis (vehicle), a function axis, and a cost axis. The focus will be on operations and maintenance costs and other recurring costs. Secondary tasks performed concurrent with the development of the life cycle costing model include continual support and upgrade of the R&M model. The primary result of the completed research will be a methodology and a computer implementation of the methodology to provide for timely cost analysis in support of the conceptual design activities. The major objectives of this research are: to obtain and to develop improved methods for estimating manpower, spares, software and hardware costs, facilities costs, and other cost categories as identified by NASA personnel; to construct a life cycle cost model of a space transportation system for budget exercises and performance-cost trade-off analysis during the conceptual and development stages; to continue to support modifications and enhancements to the R&M model; and to continue to assist in the development of a simulation model to provide an integrated view of the operations and support of the proposed system.

Ebeling, Charles↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Designing the Imaging and Breadboard System for FBCE-TL Project

This presentation outlines the support work done on designing the imaging and breadboard system of the Transfer Line (TL) project, which is the third module for the Flow Boiling and Condensation Experiment (FBCE) operating in the Fluids Integrated Rack on-board the International Space Station (ISS). The goal of the FBCE is to serve as a facility for flow boiling and condensation investigating two-phase flow and heat transfer data in microgravity. The TL module aims use existing FBCE hardware to study cryogenic chilldown, a large component of cryogenic propellant tank transfer research. The TL test module will perform chilldown studies with normal-perfluorohexane (nPFH), a cryogenic simulant, flowing through a super-heated line, which is heated through the process of Joule-heating. SolidWorks and Creo were used to create electrically conductive pipe junctions that connect and seal several Indium Tin Oxide (ITO) coated sapphire tube sections together to allow for low leak probability fluid flow and circumferentially uniform electrical current density. It is necessary to understand and calculate the thermal expansion of the tubing sections such that the junctions would not leak at anticipated operating temperatures and pressures, would maintain electrical contact, and not crack the crystalline tubes. Optical imaging techniques were used to build an experimentally validated image remapping process for flight-like setups of cylindrical tubes. Then MATLAB was used to create an algorithm that distorts an image based on the refraction of light passing through the mediums we were imaging through to accurately visualize the cryogenic chilldown that is of scientific interest. This research will assist NASA to move forward with long-duration spaceflight missions where knowledge of efficient heat transfer processes becomes more critical.

imaging system↗
NASA NTRS2019

Airborne Radar for sUAS Sense and Avoid

A primary challenge for the safe integration of small UAS operations into the National Airspace System (NAS) is traffic deconfliction, both from manned and unmanned aircraft. The UAS Traffic Management (UTM) project being conducted at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) considers a layered approach to separation provision, ranging from segregation of operations through airspace volumes (geofences) to autonomous sense and avoid (SAA) technologies for higher risk, densely occupied airspace. Cooperative SAA systems, such as Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) and/or vehicle-to-vehicle communication systems provide significant additional risk mitigation but they fail to adequately mitigate collision risks for non-cooperative (non-transponder equipped) airborne aircraft. The RAAVIN (Radar on Autonomous Aircraft to Verify ICAROUS Navigation) flight test being conducted by NASA and the Mid-Atlantic Aviation Partnership (MAAP) was designed to investigate the applicability and performance of a prototype, commercially available sUAS radar to detect and track non-cooperative airborne traffic, both manned and unmanned. The radar selected for this research was a Frequency Modulated Continuous Wave (FMCW) radar with 120 degree azimuth and 80 degree elevation field of view operating at 24.55GHz center frequency with a 200 MHz bandwidth. The radar transmits 2 watts of power thru a Metamaterial Electronically Scanning Array antenna in horizontal polarization. When the radar is transmitting, personnel must be at least 1 meter away from the active array to limit nonionizing radiation exposure. The radar physical dimensions are 18.7cm by 12.1cm by 4.1cm and it weighs less than 820 grams making it well suited for installation on small UASs. The onboard, SAA capability, known as ICAROUS, (Independent Configurable Architecture for Reliable Operations of Unmanned Systems), developed by NASA to support sUAS operations, will provide autonomous guidance using the traffic radar tracks from the onboard radar. The RAAVIN set of studies will be conducted in three phases. The first phase included outdoor, ground-based radar evaluations performed at the Virginia Tech’s Kentland Farm testing range in Blacksburg, VA. The test was designed to measure how well the radar could detect and track a small UAS flying in the radar’s field of view. The radar was used to monitor 5 test flights consisting of outbound, inbound and crossing routes at different ranges and altitudes. The UAS flown during the ground test was the Inspire 2, a quad copter weighing less than 4250 grams (10 pounds) at maximum payload. The radar was set up to scan and track targets over its full azimuthal field of view from 0 to 40 degrees in elevation. The radar was configured to eliminate tracks generated from any targets located beyond 2000 meters from the radar and moving at velocities under 1.45 meters per second. For subsequent phases of the study the radar will be integrated with a sUAS platform to evaluate its performance in flight for SAA applications ranging from sUAS to manned GA aircraft detections and tracking. Preliminary data analysis from the first outdoor ground tests showed the radar performed well at tracking the vehicle as it flew outbound and repeatedly maintained a track out to 1000 meters (maximum 1387 meters) until the vehicle slowed to a stop to reverse direction to fly inbound. As the Inspire flew inbound tracks from beyond 800 meters, a reacquisition time delay was consistently observed between when the Inspire exceeds a speed of 1.45 meters per second and when the radar indicated an inbound target was present and maintained its track. The time delay varied between 6 seconds to over 37 seconds for the inbound flights examined, and typically resulted in about a 200 meter closure distance before the Inspire track was maintained. The radar performed well at both acquiring and tracking the vehicle as it flew crossing routes out past 400 meters across the azimuthal field of view. The radar and ICAROUS software will be integrated and flown on a BFD-1400-SE8-E UAS during the next phase of the RAAVIN project. The main goal at the conclusion of this effort is to determine if this radar technology can reliably support minimum requirements for SAA applications of sUAS. In particular, the study will measure the range of vehicle detections, lateral and vertical angular errors, false and missed/late detections, and estimated distance at closest point of approach after an avoidance maneuver is executed. This last metric is directly impacted by sensor performance and indicates its suitability for the task.

Szatkowski, George N.↗
NASA NTRS1985

Finite difference operators on unstructured triangular meshes

A new form of the Laplace operator is derived which is shown to be second-order accurate when calculated at mesh triangle nodes if the cells corresponding to the nodes have a high degree of symmetry. It is demonstrated that the Laplace operator directly derived from Stokes' integral theorem is only zeroth-order accurate on these same cells. The construction of gradient and Laplace operators on unstructured triangular grids are discussed from the variational point of view. Two discrete representations of the Laplacian are compared to each other, and conclusions are drawn regarding their accuracy on a pointwise basis. Finally, geometric relations valid on arbitrary polygons are given for completeness in an appendix.

Erlebacher, G.↗