Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “performance contracting”

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.

1,382 records · Page 77

EOS-AM1 Nickel Hydrogen Cell

This paper reports the interim results of the Earth Observing System AM-1 project (EOS-AM-1) nickel hydrogen cell life test being conducted under contract to National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) at the Lockheed Martin Missile and Space (LMMS) facility in East Windsor, NJ; and at COMSAT Labs., Clarksburg, MD. The purpose of die tests is to verify that the EOS-AM-1 cell design can meet five years of real-time Low Earth Orbit (LEO) cycling. The tests include both real-time LEO and accelerated stress tests. At LMMS, the first real-time LEO simulated 99 minute orbital cycle started on February 7, 1994 and the test has been running continuously since that time, with 18,202 LEO cycles completed as of September 1, 1997. Each cycle consists of a 64 minute charge (VT at 1.507 volts per cell, 1.06 C/D ratio, followed by 0.6 ampere trickle charge) and a 35 minute constant power discharge at 177 watts (22.5% DOD). At COMSAT, the accelerated stress test consists of 90 minute orbital cycles at 60% DOD with a 30 minute discharge at 60 amperes and a 60 minute charge at 40 amperes (VT at 1.54 volts per cell to 1.09 C/D ratio, followed by 0.6 ampere trickle charge). The real-time LEO life test battery consists of seven, 50AH (nameplate rating) Eagle-Picher, Inc. (EPI) Mantech cells manufactured into three, 3-cell pack assemblies (there are two place holder cells that are not part of the life test electrical circuit). The test pack is configured to simulate the conductive thermal design of the spacecraft battery, including: conductive aluminum sleeves, 3-cell pack aluminum baseplate, and honeycomb panel all mounted to a liquid (-5 C) cold plate. The entire assembly is located in a thermal chamber operating at +30 C. The accelerated stress test unit consists of five cells mounted in machined aluminum test sleeves and is operating at +10 C. The real-time LEO life test battery has met all performance requirements through the first 18,202 cycles, including: end of charge mid discharge cell voltages and voltage gradients; end of charge and discharge cell pressures; within cell and between cell temperature gradients; discharge capacity; current and power levels; and all charge parameters. The accelerated stress test battery has completed 11,998 cycles when the test was terminated. The stress test unit met all test parameters. This paper reports battery perfortnances as a funcfion of cycle life for both the real-time LEO and the accelerated life test regimes.

Bennett, Charles W.↗

EOS-AM1 Nickel Hydrogen Cell Interim Life Test Report

This paper reports the interim results Earth Observing System AM-1 project (EOS-AM-1) nickel hydrogen cell life test being conducted under contract to National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) at the Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space (LMMS) facility in East Windsor, NJ; and at COMSAT Labs., Clarksburg, MD. The purpose of the tests is to verify that the EOS-AM-1 cell design can meet five years of real-time Low Earth Orbit (LEO) cycling. The tests include both real-time LEO and accelerated stress tests. At LMMS, the first real-time LEO simulated 99 minute orbital cycle started on February 7, 1994 and the test has been running continuously since that time, with 18202 LEO cycles completed as of September 1, 1997. Each cycle consists of a 64-minute charge (VT at 1,507 volts per cell, 1.06 C/D ratio, followed by 0.6 ampere trickle charge) and a 35 minute constant power discharge at 177 watts (22.5 percent DOD). At COMSAT, the accelerated stress test consists of 90 minute orbital cycles at 60 percent DOD with a 30 minute discharge at 60 amperes and a 60 minute charge at 40 amperes (VT at 1.54 volts per cell to 1.90 C/D ratio, followed by 0.6 ampere trickle charge). The real-time LEO life test battery consists of seven, 50AH (nameplate rating) Eagle-Picher, Inc. (EPI) Mantech cells manufactured into three, 3-cell pack assemblies (there are two place holder cells that are not part of the life test electrical circuit). The test pack is configured to simulate the conductive thermal design of the spacecraft battery, including: conductive aluminum sleeves, 3-cell pack aluminum baseplate, and honeycomb panel all mounted to a liquid (minus 5 deg) cold plate. The entire assembly is located in a thermal chamber operating at plus 3 deg. The accelerated stress test unit consists of five cells mounted in machined aluminum test sleeves and is operating at plus 10 deg. The real-time LEO life test battery has met all performance requirements through the first 18,202 cycles, including: end of charge and discharge cell voltages and voltage gradients; end of charge and discharge cells pressures; within cell and between cell temperature gradients dischare capacity; current and power levels; and all charge parameters. The accelerated stress test battery has completed 11998 cycles when the test was terminated. The stress test unit met all test parameters. This paper reports battery performances as a function of cycle life for both the real-time LEO and the accelerated life test regimes.

Bennett, Charles W.↗

NextSTEP Appendix A Modular ECLSS Effort Lessons Learned

NASA’s Artemis program provides the first steps for earth-independent exploration starting with crewed habitats in cislunar space and progressing toward crewed landings on the lunar surface that will prepare systems and crews for the exploration of Mars. The Next Space Technology for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) is a public-private partnership model that facilitates commercial development of deep space exploration capabilities in support of more extensive human spaceflight missions in and beyond cislunar space. NASA issued the original NextSTEP Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) to U.S. industry in late 2014 and issued the second BAA (NextSTEP-2) in April 2016. The first appendix under NextSTEP-2, Appendix A, focused on developing deep space habitation concepts, engineering design and development, and risk reduction efforts leading to a habitation capability in cislunar space. NASA solicited concepts to develop and refine the evolvable, modular architecture, functional allocation options, standards, and common interfaces required to enable interoperability of the aggregate system to provide long duration deep space transit habitation, specifically enhancements and testing of deep space Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS). Collins Aerospace, formerly UTC Aerospace Systems (UTAS), was awarded a Phase 1 and subsequent Phase 2 contract to “develop concepts that group ECLS systems into logical modules maximizing the use of common components and the development of unique methods and design concepts that support in-flight maintenance and repair for future exploration systems.” This paper summarizes the work accomplished under this effort, the lessons that can be applied to development of forthcoming habitation elements, and the gaps remaining to achieve a more resilient, maintainable, repairable and adaptable system capable of installation on a wide variety of habitat platforms. A primary accomplishment of this effort is the development and maturation of a modular palletization concept to enable standard rack interfaces, post-launch outfitting, and decoupling of structural supports that withstand launch environments from those needed for lower on-orbit loads in order to reduce installed mass and repurposing of panels within the habitat. In the course of the effort, Collins assessed numerous architecture trades, including the use of condensing and noncondensing heat exchangers, the ability of modular units to accommodate various habitat volumes and thermal loading, and the most appropriate order of and timing of delivery of regenerative ECLSS hardware to orbital habitats. In addition to the modularity of hardware elements, Collins developed software approaches for distributed/modular command, control, and communication systems and innovative Bayesian fault detection and isolation techniques. Finally, the effort explored advanced maintainability and supportability concepts including the definition of maintenance units (MUs) in place of the traditional Orbital Replacement Units (ORUs), increasing parts commonality to reduce the number and type of spare parts, the use of augmented reality to guide crews during maintenance and repair procedures, and how crews would prepare for and recover from long durations of habitat dormancy. Now that the NextSTEP Modular ECLSS effort has come to a close, it’s important to identify the lessons learned and where they can be leveraged to improve NASA’s broader program of ECLSS technology development and demonstration and ultimately how they can increase the performance of future surface and orbital habitats.

NextSTEP↗

NextSTEP Appendix A Modular ECLSS Effort Lessons Learned

NASA’s Artemis program provides the first steps for earth-independent exploration starting with crewed habitats in cislunar space and progressing toward crewed landings on the lunar surface that will prepare systems and crews for the exploration of Mars. The Next Space Technology for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) is a public-private partnership model that facilitates commercial development of deep space exploration capabilities in support of more extensive human spaceflight missions in and beyond cislunar space. NASA issued the original NextSTEP Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) to U.S. industry in late 2014 and issued the second BAA (NextSTEP-2) in April 2016. The first appendix under NextSTEP-2, Appendix A, focused on developing deep space habitation concepts, engineering design and development, and risk reduction efforts leading to a habitation capability in cislunar space. NASA solicited concepts to develop and refine the evolvable, modular architecture, functional allocation options, standards, and common interfaces required to enable interoperability of the aggregate system to provide long duration deep space transit habitation, specifically enhancements and testing of deep space Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS). Collins Aerospace, formerly UTC Aerospace Systems (UTAS), was awarded a Phase 1 and subsequent Phase 2 contract to “develop concepts that group ECLS systems into logical modules maximizing the use of common components and the development of unique methods and design concepts that support in-flight maintenance and repair for future exploration systems.” This paper summarizes the work accomplished under this effort, the lessons that can be applied to development of forthcoming habitation elements, and the gaps remaining to achieve a more resilient, maintainable, repairable and adaptable system capable of installation on a wide variety of habitat platforms. A primary accomplishment of this effort is the development and maturation of a modular palletization concept to enable standard rack interfaces, post-launch outfitting, and decoupling of structural supports that withstand launch environments from those needed for lower on-orbit loads in order to reduce installed mass and repurposing of panels within the habitat. In the course of the effort, Collins assessed numerous architecture trades, including the use of condensing and noncondensing heat exchangers, the ability of modular units to accommodate various habitat volumes and thermal loading, and the most appropriate order of and timing of delivery of regenerative ECLSS hardware to orbital habitats. In addition to the modularity of hardware elements, Collins developed software approaches for distributed/modular command, control, and communication systems and innovative Bayesian fault detection and isolation techniques. Finally, the effort explored advanced maintainability and supportability concepts including the definition of maintenance units (MUs) in place of the traditional Orbital Replacement Units (ORUs), increasing parts commonality to reduce the number and type of spare parts, the use of augmented reality to guide crews during maintenance and repair procedures, and how crews would prepare for and recover from long durations of habitat dormancy. Now that the NextSTEP Modular ECLSS effort has come to a close, it’s important to identify the lessons learned and where they can be leveraged to improve NASA’s broader program of ECLSS technology development and demonstration and ultimately how they can increase the performance of future surface and orbital habitats.

NextSTEP↗

Overview of NASA GRC Stirling Technology Development

The Stirling Radioisotope Generator (SRG) is currently being developed by Lockheed Martin Astronautics (LMA) under contract to the Depar1ment of Energy (DOE). The generator will be a high efficiency electric power source for NASA Space Science missions with the capability to operate in the vacuum of deep space or in an atmosphere such as on the surface of Mars. High system efficiency is obtained through the use of free-piston Stirling power conversion technology. Power output of the generator will be greater than 100 watts at the beginning of life with the decline in power being largely due to the decay of the plutonium heat source. In suppOl1 of the DOE SRG project, the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) has established a near-term technology effort to provide some of the critical data to ensure a successful transition to flight for what will be the first dynamic power system used in space. Initially, a limited number of technical areas were selected for the GRC effort, however this is now being expanded to more thoroughly cover a range of technical issues. The tasks include in-house testing of Stirling convertors and controllers, materials evaluation and heater head life assessment, structural dynamics, electromagnetic interference, organics evaluation, and reliability analysis. Most of these high-level tasks have several subtasks within. There is also an advanced technology effort that is complementary near-term technology effort. Many of the tests make use of the 55-We Technology Demonstration Convel10r (TDC). There have been multiple controller tests to support the LMA flight controller design effort. Preparation is continuing for a thermal/vacuum system demonstration. A pair of flight prototype TDC's have recently been placed on an extended test with unattended, continuous operation. Heater head life assessment efforts continue, with the material data being refined and the analysis moving toward the system perspective. Long-term magnet aging tests are continuing to characterize any possible aging in the strength or demagnetization resistance of the permanent magnets used in the linear alternator. In a parallel effort, higher performance magnets are also being evaluated. A reliability effort is being initiated that will help to guide the development activities with an increased focus on the necessary components and subsystems. Some other disciplines that are active in the GRC technology effort include structural dynamics, linear alternator analysis, EMI/EMC, controls, and mechanical design evaluation. This paper will provide an overview of some of the GRC technical efforts, including the current status, and a description of future efforts.

Schreiber, Jeffrey↗

30-kW SEP Spacecraft as Secondary Payloads for Low-Cost Deep Space Science Missions

The Solar Array System contracts awarded by NASA's Space Technology Mission Directorate are developing solar arrays in the 30 kW to 50 kW power range (beginning of life at 1 AU) that have significantly higher specific powers (W/kg) and much smaller stowed volumes than conventional rigid-panel arrays. The successful development of these solar array technologies has the potential to enable new types of solar electric propulsion (SEP) vehicles and missions. This paper describes a 30-kW electric propulsion vehicle built into an EELV Secondary Payload Adapter (ESPA) ring. The system uses an ESPA ring as the primary structure and packages two 15-kW Megaflex solar array wings, two 14-kW Hall thrusters, a hydrazine Reaction Control Subsystem (RCS), 220 kg of xenon, 26 kg of hydrazine, and an avionics module that contains all of the rest of the spacecraft bus functions and the instrument suite. Direct-drive is used to maximize the propulsion subsystem efficiency and minimize the resulting waste heat and required radiator area. This is critical for packaging a high-power spacecraft into a very small volume. The fully-margined system dry mass would be approximately 1120 kg. This is not a small dry mass for a Discovery-class spacecraft, for example, the Dawn spacecraft dry mass was only about 750 kg. But the Dawn electric propulsion subsystem could process a maximum input power of 2.5 kW, and this spacecraft would process 28 kW, an increase of more than a factor of ten. With direct-drive the specific impulse would be limited to about 2,000 s assuming a nominal solar array output voltage of 300 V. The resulting spacecraft would have a beginning of life acceleration that is more than an order of magnitude greater than the Dawn spacecraft. Since the spacecraft would be built into an ESPA ring it could be launched as a secondary payload to a geosynchronous transfer orbit significantly reducing the launch costs for a planetary spacecraft. The SEP system would perform the escape from Earth and then the heliocentric transfer to the science target.

Dawn spacecraft↗

Advancing Innovation Through Collaboration: Implementation of the NASA Space Life Sciences Strategy

On October 18, 2010, the NASA Human Health and Performance center (NHHPC) was opened to enable collaboration among government, academic and industry members. Membership rapidly grew to 90 members (http://nhhpc.nasa.gov ) and members began identifying collaborative projects as detailed in this article. In addition, a first workshop in open collaboration and innovation was conducted on January 19, 2011 by the NHHPC resulting in additional challenges and projects for further development. This first workshop was a result of the SLSD successes in running open innovation challenges over the past two years. In 2008, the NASA Johnson Space Center, Space Life Sciences Directorate (SLSD) began pilot projects in open innovation (crowd sourcing) to determine if these new internet-based platforms could indeed find solutions to difficult technical problems. From 2008 to 2010, the SLSD issued 34 challenges, 14 externally and 20 internally. The 14 external challenges were conducted through three different vendors: InnoCentive, Yet2.com and TopCoder. The 20 internal challenges were conducted using the InnoCentive platform, customized to NASA use, and promoted as NASA@Work. The results from the 34 challenges involved not only technical solutions that were reported previously at the 61st IAC, but also the formation of new collaborative relationships. For example, the TopCoder pilot was expanded by the NASA Space Operations Mission Directorate to the NASA Tournament Lab in collaboration with Harvard Business School and TopCoder. Building on these initial successes, the NHHPC workshop in January of 2011, and ongoing NHHPC member discussions, several important collaborations have been developed: (1) Space Act Agreement between NASA and GE for collaborative projects (2) NASA and academia for a Visual Impairment / Intracranial Hypertension summit (February 2011) (3) NASA and the DoD through the Defense Venture Catalyst Initiative (DeVenCI) for a technical needs workshop (June 2011) (4) NASA and the San Diego Zoo for a joint challenge in biomimicry (5) NASA and the FAA Center of Excellence for Commercial Space Flight for five collaborative projects (6) NASA and ESA for a Space Medicine Workshop (July 2011) (7) NASA and Tufts University for an education pilot (8) Establishment of long-term contracts (August 2011) to enable future challenges (9) Establishment of a new Center of Excellence for Collaborative Innovation (July 2011) for all federal agencies in the US

Davis, Jeffrey R.↗

Hot-Fire Test Results of an Oxygen/RP-2 Multi-Element Oxidizer-Rich Staged-Combustion Integrated Test Article

As part of the Combustion Stability Tool Development project funded by the Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center, the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center was contracted to assemble and hot-fire test a multi-element integrated test article demonstrating combustion characteristics of an oxygen/hydrocarbon propellant oxidizer-rich staged-combustion engine thrust chamber. Such a test article simulates flow through the main injectors of oxygen/kerosene oxidizer-rich staged combustion engines such as the Russian RD-180 or NK-33 engines, or future U.S.-built engine systems such as the Aerojet-Rocketdyne AR-1 engine or the Hydrocarbon Boost program demonstration engine. For the thrust chamber assembly of the test article, several configurations of new main injectors, using relatively conventional gas-centered swirl coaxial injector elements, were designed and fabricated. The design and fabrication of these main injectors are described in a companion paper at this JANNAF meeting. New ablative combustion chambers were fabricated based on hardware previously used at NASA for testing at similar size and pressure. An existing oxygen/RP-1 oxidizer-rich subscale preburner injector from a previous NASA-funded program, along with existing and new inter-connecting hot gas duct hardware, were used to supply the oxidizer-rich combustion products to the oxidizer circuit of the main injector of the thrust chamber. Results from independent hot-fire tests of the preburner injector in a combustion chamber with a sonic throat are described in companion papers at this JANNAF conference. The resulting integrated test article - which includes the preburner, inter-connecting hot gas duct, main injector, and ablative combustion chamber - was assembled at Test Stand 116 at the East Test Area of the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center. The test article was well instrumented with static and dynamic pressure, temperature, and acceleration sensors to allow the collected data to be used for combustion analysis model development. Hot-fire testing was conducted with main combustion chamber pressures ranging from 1400 to 2100 psia, and main combustion chamber mixture ratios ranging from 2.4 to 2.9. Different levels of fuel film cooling injected from the injector face were examined ranging from none to about 12% of the total fuel flow. This paper presents the hot-fire test results of the integrated test article. Combustion performance, stability, thermal, and compatibility characteristics of both the preburner and the thrust chamber are described. Another companion paper at this JANNAF meeting includes additional and more detailed test data regarding the combustion dynamics and stability characteristics.

Hulka, J. R.↗

Near-Net-Shape Processing of Sintered Fibrous Ceramics Achieved

A variety of sintered fibrous ceramic (SFC) materials have been developed over the last 50 years as thermal barrier materials for reentry applications. SFC materials typically exhibit very low thermal conductivities combined with low densities and good thermal stability up to 2500 F. These materials have flown successfully on the space shuttle orbiters since the 1960's. More recently, the McDonnell Douglas Corporation successfully used SFC tiles as a heat shield on the underside of its DC X test vehicle. For both of these applications, tiles are machined from blocks of a specific type of SFC called an alumina-enhanced thermal barrier (AETB). The sizes of these blocks have been limited by the manufacturing process. In addition, as much as 80 to 90 percent of the material can be lost during the machining of tiles with significant amounts of curvature. To address these problems, the NASA Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field entered a cooperative contract with the Boeing Company to develop a vacuum-assisted forming process that can produce large (approximately 4 square feet), severely contoured panels of AETB while saving costs in comparison to the conventional cast-and-machine billet process. For shuttle use, AETB is slurry cast, drained, and fired to form square billets conforming to the shape of the filtration box. The billets are then cut into tiles of the appropriate size for thermally protecting the space shuttle. Processing techniques have limited the maximum size of AETB billets to 21.5 square inches by 6.5-in. thick, but the space shuttles use discrete heat shield tiles no more than 8 to 12 square inches. However, in other applications, large, complex shapes are needed, and the tiling approach is undesirable. For such applications, vacuum-assisted forming can produce large parts with complex shapes while reducing machining waste and eliminating cemented joints between bonded billets. Because it allows contoured shapes to be formed, material utilization is inherently high. Initial estimates show that the amount of material lost during machining can be reduced by 50 percent or more. In addition, a fiber alignment favorable for minimum heat transfer is maintained for all panel shapes since the fibers are aligned parallel to the contoured surface of the forming tool or mold. The vacuum-assisted forming process can complete the entire forming operation in a matter of minutes and can produce multiple parts whose size is limited only by the size of the forming tool. To date, panels as large as 2 square feet have been demonstrated The vacuum-assisted forming process starts with the fabrication of a permeable forming tool, or mold, with the proper part contour. This reusable tool is mounted over an internal rib support structure, as depicted in the diagram, such that a vacuum can be pulled on the bottom portion of the tool. AETB slurry is then poured over and around the tool, liquid is drawn from the slurry, and the part forms over the tool surface. The part is then dried, fired, and finished machined. Future plans include an evaluation of the need for additional coatings and surface-toughness treatments to extend the durability and performance of this material.

Angel, Paul W.↗

Sounds like Team Spirit

I recently accompanied my son Dan to one of his guitar lessons. As I sat in a separate room, I focused on the music he was playing and the beautiful, robust sound that comes from a well-played guitar. Later that night, I woke up around 3 am. I tend to have my best thoughts at this hour. The trouble is I usually roll over and fall back asleep. This time I was still awake an hour later, so I got up and jotted some notes down in my study. I was thinking about the pure, honest sound of a well-played instrument. From there my mind wandered into the realm of high-performance teams and successful projects. (I know this sounds weird, but this is the sort of thing I think about at 3 am. Maybe you have your own weird thoughts around that time.) Consider a team in relation to music. It seems to me that a crack team can achieve a beautiful, perfect unity in the same way that a band of brilliant musicians can when they're in harmony with one another. With more than a little satisfaction I have to admit, I started to think about the great work performed for you by the Knowledge Sharing team, including this magazine you are reading. Over the past two years I personally have received some of my greatest pleasures as the APPL Director from the Knowledge Sharing activities - the Masters Forums, NASA Center visits, ASK Magazine. The Knowledge Sharing team expresses such passion for their work, just like great musicians convey their passion in the music they play. In the case of Knowledge Sharing, there are many factors that have made this so enjoyable (and hopefully worthwhile for NASA). Three ingredients come to mind -- ingredients that have produced a signature sound. First, through the crazy, passionate playing of Alex Laufer, Michelle Collins, Denise Lee, and Todd Post, I always know that something startling and original is going to come out of their activities. This team has consistently done things that are unique and innovative. For me, best of all is that they are always trying to improve on what they've done before. Second, success in any endeavor stems from people who know how to interpret a composition to sound beautiful when played in a different style. For Knowledge Sharing to work, it must be adapted, reinterpreted, shaped and played with at the centers. In this regard, we've been blessed with another crazy, passionate, inspired artist named Claire Smith. Claire has turned Ames Research Center in California into APPL-west. She is so good and committed to what she does that I just refer people to her whenever they have questions about implementing project management development at the field level. Finally, any great effort requires talented people working behind the scenes, the people who formulate a business approach and know how to manage the money so that the music gets heard. I have known many brilliant and creative people with a ton of ideas that never take off due to an inability to work the business. Again, the Knowledge Sharing team has been fortunate to have competent and passionate people, specifically Tony Maturo and his procurement team at Goddard Space Flight Center, to make sure the process is in place to support the effort. This kind of support is every bit as crucial as the activity itself, and the efforts and creativity that go into successful procurement and contracting is a vital ingredient of this successful team.

Hoffman, Edward↗

Nuclear Thermal Propulsion Ground Test History

Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) was started in ~1955 under the Atomic Energy Commission as project Rover and was assigned to Los Alamos National Laboratory. The Nevada Test Site was selected in 1956 and facility construction began in 1957. The KIWI-A was tested on July 1, 1959 for 5 minutes at 70MW. KIWI-A1 was tested on July 8, 1960 for 6 minutes at 85MW. KIWI-A3 was tested on October 10, 1960 for 5 minutes at 100MW. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) was formed in 1958. On August 31, 1960 the AEC and NASA established the Space Nuclear Propulsion Office and named Harold Finger as Director. Immediately following the formation of SNPO, contracts were awarded for the Reactor In Flight Test (RIFT), master plan for the Nuclear Rocket Engine Development Station (NRDS), and the Nuclear Engine for Rocket Vehicle Application (NERVA). From December 7, 1961 to November 30, 1962, the KIWI-B1A, KIWI-B1B, and KIWI-B4A were tested at test cell A. The last two engines were only tested for several seconds before noticeable failure of the fuel elements. Harold Finger called a stop to any further hot fire testing until the problem was well understood. The KIWI-B4A cold flow test showed the problem to be related to fluid dynamics of hydrogen interstitial flow causing fuel element vibrations. President Kennedy visited the NTS one week after the KIWI-B4A failure and got to see the engine starting to be disassembled in the maintenance facility. The KIWI-B4D and KIWI-B4E were modified to not have the vibration problems and were tested in test cell C. The NERVA NRX program started testing in early 1964 with NRX-A1 cold flow test series (unfueled graphite core), NRX-A2 and NRX-A3 power test series up to 1122 MW for 13 minutes. In March 1966, the NRX-EST (Engine System Test) was the first breadboard using flight functional relationship and total operating time of 116 minutes. The NRX-EST demonstrated the feasibility of a hot bleed cycle. The NRX-A5 had multiple start-ups in May-June 1966 with 30.75 minutes accumulative operating time at or above 1GW. The NRX-A6 was tested in December 1969 and ran for 62 minutes at 1100 MW. Each engine had post-test examination and found various structure anomalies which were identified for correction and the fuel element corrosion rate was reduced. The Phoebus series of research reactors began testing at test cell C, in June 1965 with Phoebus 1A. Phoebus 1A operated for 10.5 minutes at 1100 MW before unexpected loss of propellant and leading to an engine breakdown. Phoebus 1B ran for 30 minutes in February of 1967. Phoebus 2A was the highest steady state reactor built at 5GW. Phoebus 2A ran for 12 minutes at 4100 MW demonstrating sufficient power is available. The Peewee test bed reactor was tested November- December 1968 in test cell C for 40 minutes at 500MW with overall performance close to pre-run predictions. The XE' engine was the only engine tested with close to a flight configuration and fired downward into a diffuser at the Engine Test Stand (ETS) in 1969. The XE' was 1100 MW and had ~28 start-ups. The nuclear furnace NF-1 was operated at 44 MW with multiple test runs at 90 minutes in the summer of 1972. The NF-1 was the last NTP reactor tested. The Rover/NERVA program was cancelled in 1973. However, before cancellation, a lot of other engineering work was conducted by Aerojet on a 75, 000 lbf prototype flight engine and by Los Alamos on a ~16,000 lbf "Small Engine" nuclear rocket design. The ground test history of NTP at the NRDS also offers many lessons learned on how best to setup, operate, emergency shutdown, and post-test examine NTP engines. The reactor and engine maintenance and disassembly facilities were used for assembly and inspection of radioactive engines after testing. Most reactor/ engines were run at test cell A or test cell C with open air exhaust. The Rover/NERVA program became aware of a new environmental regulation that would restrict the amount of radioactive particulates allowed to be release in open air and successfully demonstrated a scrubber concept with the NF-1. The ETS stand was the only one with a high altitude test chamber used for XE'. The ETS and other test cells showed the effects the engine's radiation had on the facility materials and instrumentation as well as side effects the ground test facility has back on the engine operation. The breakdown of Phoebus 1A at test cell C showed how the site was cleaned up and back to operation for five more engines before the program was cancelled.

Gerrish, Harold P.↗

Vulnerability to dysfunction and muscle injury after unloading

OBJECTIVE: To test whether unloading increases vulnerability to eccentric exercise-induced dysfunction and muscle injury. DESIGN: Before-after trial. SETTING: General community. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Two women and 5 men (73 +/- 3kg [mean +/- SE]) who were active college students but were not trained in lower body resistance exercise volunteered. INTERVENTION: Five weeks of unilateral lower limb suspension (ULLS), which has been shown to decrease strength and size of the unloaded, left, but not load-bearing, right quadriceps femoris muscle group (QF) by 20% and 14%, respectively; performance of 10 sets of ten eccentric actions with each QF immediately after the ULLS strength tests with a load equivalent to 65% of the post-ULLS eccentric 1-repetition maximum. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Concentric and eccentric 1-repetition maximum for the left, unloaded and the right, load-bearing QF measured immediately after ULLS and 1,4,7,9, and 11 days later; cross-sectional area and spin-spin relaxation time (T2) of each QF as determined by magnetic resonance imaging and measured the last day of ULLS and 3 days later. RESULTS: The mean load used for eccentric exercise was 23 +/- 2 and 30 +/- 3kg for the left, unloaded and right, load-bearing QF, respectively. The concentric and eccentric 1-repetition maximum for the unloaded and already weakened left QF was further decreased by 18% (p = .000) and 27% (p = .000), respectively, 1 day after eccentric exercise. Strength did not return to post-ULLS levels until 7 days of recovery. The right, load-bearing QF showed a 4% decrease (p = .002) in the eccentric 1-repetition maximum 1 day after eccentric exercise. The left, unloaded QF showed an increase in T2 (p = .002) in 18% of its cross-sectional area 3 days after the eccentric exercise, thus indicating muscle injury. The right, load-bearing QF showed no elevation in T2 (p = .280). CONCLUSION: Unloading increases vulnerability to eccentric exercise-induced dysfunction and muscle injury, even at relatively light loads.

NASA Program Space Physiology and Countermeasures↗

Ignition Characterization Test Results for the LO2/Ethanol Propellant Combination

A series of contracts were issued by the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) un der the auspices of the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate to de velop and expand the maturity of candidate technologies considered to be important for future space exploration. One such technology was to determine the viability of incorporating non-toxic propellants for R eaction Control Subsystems (RCS). Contract NAS8-01109 was issued to A erojet to develop a dual thrust Reaction Control Engine (RCE) that ut ilized liquid oxygen and ethanol as the propellants. The dual thrust RCE incorporated a primary thrust level of 870 lbf, and a vernier thru st level of 10 - 30 lbf. The preferred RCS approach for the dual thru st RCE was to utilize pressure-fed liquid oxygen (LOX) and ethanol pr opellants; however, previous dual thrust feasibility testing incorporated GOX/Ethanol igniters as opposed to LOX/Ethanol igniters in the de sign. GOX/Ethanol was easier to ignite, but this combination had syst em design implications of providing GOX for the igniters. A LOX/Ethan ol igniter was desired; however, extensive LOX/Ethanol ignition data over the anticipated operating range for the dual thrust RCE did not e xist. Therefore, Aerojet designed and tested a workhorse LOX igniter to determine LOX/Ethanol ignition characteristics as part of a risk m itigation effort for the dual thrust RCE design. The objective of the ignition testing was to demonstrate successful ignition from GOX to LOX, encompassing potential two-phase flow conditions anticipated being present in real mission applications. A workhorse igniter was desig ned to accommodate the full LOX design flowrate, as well as a reduced GOX flowrate. It was reasoned that the initial LOX flow through the igniter would flash to GOX due to the latent heat stored in the hardwa re, causing a reduced oxygen flowrate because of a choked, or sonic, flow condition through the injection elements. As LOX flow continued, the hardware would chill-in, with the injected oxygen flow transitioning from cold GOX through two'phase flow to subcooled LOX. The Workh orse igniter was well instrumented: Pressure and temperature instrumentation permitted oxygen state points to be determined in the igniter oxidizer manifold, and gas-side igniter chamber thermocouples provide d chamber thermal profile characteristics. The cold flow chamber pres sure (Pc) for each test was determined and coupled with the igniter chamber diameter (De) to calculate the characteristic quench parameter (Pc x Dc), which was plotted as a function of core mixture ratio, MRc . Ignition limits were determined over a broad range of valve inlet conditions, and ignition was demonstrated with oxygen inlet conditions that ranged from subcooled 210 deg R LOX to 486 deg R GOX. Once ign ited at cold GOX conditions, combustion was continuous as the hardwar e chilled in and the core mixture ratio transitioned from values near 1.0 to over 12.5. Pulsing is required in typical RCS engines; therefore, the workhorse igniter was pulse tested to verify the ability to pr ovide the required ignition for a pulsing RCE. The minimum electrical pulse width (EPW) of the dual thrust RCE was 0.080 seconds. Igniter pulse tests were performed at three conditions: (1) an EPW of 0.080 se conds at 25% duty cycle for 400 pulses; (2) an EPW of 0.160 seconds a nd a 5% duty cycle for 124 pulses; (3) an EPW of 0.160 seconds and a 50% duty cycle for 380 pulses. Successful ignition of LOX/Ethanol was demonstrated over a broad range of valve inlet conditions, with the empirically determined LOX/Ethanol ignition limits extending the previous database established for GOX/Ethanol ignition limits. Although th e observed chill-in characteristics of the hardware varied significan tly with flowrate, ignition was readily achieved. Combustion was marg inal at extremely fuel-rich conditions, and it fluctuated as the oxygen passed rough the twophase flow regime during the period of hardware chill-in. Pulse testing showed good repeatability with 100 percent r e-ignition for all pulses. Certain pulse-to-pulse repeatability requirements for actual RCS operation may necessitate establishment of mini mum oxygen flow rates and engine thrust levels for satisfactory engin e performance.

Robinson, Philip J.↗

Water Across Synthetic Aperture Radar Data (WASARD): SAR Water Body Classification for the Open Data Cube

The detection of inland water bodies from Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data provides a great advantage over water detection with optical data, since SAR imaging is not impeded by cloud cover. Traditional methods of detecting water from SAR data involves using thresholding methods that can be labor intensive and imprecise. This paper describes Water Across Synthetic Aperture Radar Data (WASARD): a method of water detection from SAR data which automates and simplifies the thresholding process using machine learning on training data created from Geoscience Australia’s WOFS algorithm. Of the machine learning models tested, the Linear Support Vector Machine was determined to be optimal, with the option of training using solely the VH polarization or a combination of the VH and VV polarizations. WASARD was able to identify water in the target area with a correlation of 97% with WOFS. Sentinel-1, Open Data Cube, Earth Observations, Machine Learning, Water Detection 1. INTRODUCTION Water classification is an important function of Earth imaging satellites, as accurate remote classification of land and water can assist in land use analysis, flood prediction, climate change research, as well as a variety of agricultural applications [2]. The ability to identify bodies of water remotely via satellite is immensely cheaper than contracting surveys of the areas in question, meaning that an application that can accurately use satellite data towards this function can make valuable information available to nations which would not be able to afford it otherwise. Highly reliable applications for the remote detection of water currently exist for use with optical satellite data such as that provided by LANDSAT. One such application, Geoscience Australia’s Water Observations from Space (WOFS) has already been ported for use with the Open Data Cube [6]. However, water detection using optical data from Landsat is constrained by its relatively long revisit cycle of 16 days [5], and water detection using any optical data is constrained in that it lacks the ability to make accurate classifications through cloud cover [2]. The alternative solution which solves these problems is water detection using SAR data, which images the Earth using cloud-penetrating microwaves. Because of its advantages over optical data, much research has been done into water detection using SAR data. Traditionally, this has been done using the thresholding method, which involves picking a polarization band and labeling all pixels for which this band’s value is below a certain threshold as containing water. The thresholding method works since water tends to return a much lower backscatter value to the satellite than land [1]. However, this method can be flawed since estimating the proper threshold is often imprecise, complicated, and labor intensive for the end user. Thresholding also tends to use data from only one SAR polarization, when a combination of polarizations can provide insight into whether water is present. [2] In order to alleviate these problems, this paper presents an application for the Open Data Cube to detect water from SAR data using support vector machine (SVM) classification. 2. PLATFORM WASARD is an application for the Open Data Cube, a mechanism which provides a simple yet efficient means of ingesting, storing, and retrieving remote sensing data. Data can be ingested and made analysis ready according to whatever specifications the researcher chooses, and easily resampled to artificially alter a scene’s resolution. Currently WASARD supports water detection on scenes from ESA’s Sentinel-1 and JAXA’s ALOS. When testing WASARD, Sentinel-1 was most commonly used due to its relatively high spatial resolution and its rapid 6 day revisit cycle [5]. With minor alterations to the application's code, however, it could support data from other satellites. 3. METHODOLOGY Using supervised classification, WASARD compares SAR data to a dataset pre-classified by WOFS in order to train an SVM classifier. This classifier is then used to detect water in other SAR scenes outside the training set. Accuracy was measured according to the following metrics:  Precision: a measure of what percentage of the points WASARD labels as water are truly water  Recall: a measure of what percentage of the total water cover WASARD was able to identify.  F1 Score: a harmonic average of the precision and recall scores Both precision and recall are calculated at the end of the training phase, when the trained classifier is compared to a testing dataset. Because the WOFS algorithm’s classifications are used as the truth values when training a WASARD classifier, when precision and recall are mentioned in this paper, they are always with respect to the values produced by WOFS on a similar scene of Landsat data, which themselves have a classification accuracy of 97% [6]. Visual representations of water identified by WASARD in this paper were produced using the function wasard_plot(), which is included in WASARD. 3.1 Algorithm Selection The machine learning model used by WASARD is the Linear Support Vector Machine (SVM). This model uses a supervised learning algorithm to develop a classifier, meaning it creates a vector which can be multiplied by the vector formed by the relevant data bands to determine whether a pixel in a SAR scene contains water. This classifier is trained by comparing data points from selected bands in a SAR scene to their respective labels, which in this case are “water” or “not water” as given by the WOFS algorithm. The SVM was selected over the Random Forest model, which outperformed the SVM in training speed, but had a greater classification time and lower accuracy, and the Multilayer Perceptron Artificial Neural Network, which had a slightly higher average accuracy than the SVM, but much greater training and classification times. Figure 1: Visual representation of the SVM Classifier. Each white point represents a pixel in a SAR scene. In Figure 1, the diagonal line separating pixels determined to be water from those determined not to be water represents the actual classification vector produced by the SVM. It is worth noting that once the model has been trained, classification of pixels is done in a similar manner as in the thresholding method. This is especially true if only one band was used to train the model. 3.1 Feature Selection Sentinel-1 collects data from two bands: the Vertical/Vertical polarization (VV) and the Vertical/Horizontal polarization (VH). When 100 SVM classifiers were created for each polarization individually, and for the combination of the two, the following results were achieved: Figure 2: Accuracy of classifiers trained using different polarization bands. Precision and Recall were measured with respect to the values produced by WOFS. Figure 2 demonstrates that using both the VV and VH bands trades slightly lower recall for significantly greater precision when compared with the VH band alone, and that using the VV band alone is inferior in both metrics. WASARD therefore defaults to using both the VV and VH bands, and includes the option to use solely the VH band. The VV polarization’s lower precision compared to the VH polarization is in contrast to results from previous research and may merit further analysis [4]. 3.2 Training a Classifier The steps in training a classifier with WASARD are 1. Selecting two scenes (one SAR, one optical) with the same spatial extents, and acquired close to each other in time, with a preference that the scenes are taken on the same day. 2. Using the WOFS algorithm to produce an array of the detected water in the scene of optical data, to be used as the labels during supervised learning 3. Data points from the selected bands from the SAR acquisition are bundled together into an array with the corresponding labels gathered from WOFS. A random sample with an equal number of points labeled “Water” and “Not Water” is selected to be partitioned into a training and a testing dataset 4. Using Scikit-Learn’s LinearSVC object, the training dataset is used to produce a classifier, which is then tested against the testing dataset to determine its precision and recall The result is a wasard_classifier object, which has the following attributes: 1. f1, recall, and precision: 3 metrics used to determine the classifier’s accuracy 2. Coefficient: Vector which the SVM uses to make its predictions. The classifier detects water when the dot product of the coefficient and the vector formed by the SAR bands is positive 3. Save(): allows a user to save a classifier to the disk in order to use it without retraining 4. wasard_classify(): Classifies an entire xarray of SAR data using the SVM classifier All of the above steps are performed automatically when the user creates a wasard_classifier object. 3.3 Classifying a Dataset Once the classifier has been created, it can be used to detect water in an xarray of SAR data using wasard_classify(). By taking the dot product of the classifier’s coefficients and the vector formed by the selected bands of SAR data, an array of predictions is constructed. A classifier can effectively be used on the same spatial extents as the ones where it was trained, or on any area with a similar landscape. While

Kreiser, Zachary↗