Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “information criterion”

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.

148 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1942

Effects of Range of Stress and of Special Notches on Fatigue Properties of Aluminum Alloys Suitable for Airplane Propellers

Laboratory tests were made to obtain information on the load-resisting properties of X76S-T aluminum alloy when subjected to static, impact, and repeated loads. Results are presented from static-load test of unnotched specimens in tension and in torsion and of notched specimens in tension. Charpy impact values obtained from bend tests on notched specimens and tension impact values for both notched and unnotched specimens tested at several different temperatures are included. The endurance limits obtained from repeated bending fatigue tests made on three different types of testing machine are given for unnotched polished specimens, and the endurance limits of notched specimens subjected to six different ranges of bending stress are also reported. The results indicated that: (a) polished rectangular specimens had an endurance limit about 30 percent less than that obtained for round specimens; (b) a comparison of endurance limits obtained from tests on three different types of machine indicated that there was no apparent effect of speed of testing on the endurance limit for the range of speeds used (1,750 to 13,000 rpm). (c) the fatigue strength (endurance limit) of the X76S-T alloy was greatly decreased by the presence of a notch in the specimens; (d) no complete fractures of the entire specimens occurred in notched fatigue specimens when subjected to stress cycles for which the mean stress at the notch during the cycle was a compressive stress; for this test condition a microscopic cracking occurred near the root of the notch and was used as a criterion of failure of the specimen. (e) as the mean stress at the notch was decreased from a tensile (+) stress to a compressive (-) stress, it was found that the alternating stress that could be superimposed on the mean stress in the cycle without causing failure of the specimens was increased.

ALUMINUM ALLOYS-ALCOA X76ST-FATIGUE↗
NASA NTRS2022

Human Stability While Exercising on a VIS Device in Zero Gravity

BACKGROUND: A Vibration Isolation and Stabilization (VIS) system is being designed for use with the European Enhanced Exploration Exercise Device (E4D) [1]. The exercise bar is attached to cables that extend and retract through openings in the E4D platform, which the subject stands on while exercising. Since the E4D is mounted on a moving VIS device, the whole system moves under the subject’s feet. While tension in the cables does help stabilize a crew member in 0g by bracing him or her against the moving platform, flexible cables do not offer full support against falling. This raises the question of whether various exercises that are successfully performed in 1g on a stationary device can be performed without losing balance in 0g on a moving device. Quantifying stability conditions and establishing stability requirements for exercise countermeasure systems is a long-standing challenge and this work helped to inform this specific need for integrated E4D/VIS flight project development. METHODS AND RESULTS: A simplified stability analysis can be attempted based on platform accelerations generated by the VIS device simulation. In this type of analysis, the subject is conceived as standing on the platform in 0g while being held down to it by the tension in the cables. If the sideways acceleration of the platform is such that the cables cannot generate a sufficient moment relative to, e.g., the heels or the toes of the subject to overcome the tipping moment from the inertial forces on the accelerated subject’s body, the subject becomes unstable. This approach, which we refer to as the ‘static’ approximation, indicated failure of all the exercises that were considered in the comprehensive VIS analysis of the E4D. It was realized, however, that platform accelerations are not externally imposed but are themselves induced by the motion of the subject’s body during exercise, and a model calculation confirmed that this drastically altered the tipping moment on the subject, with the potential to even switch the direction in which the body would tip over. This made it imperative to consider in a coupled manner both the motion of the exercising subject’s body and the induced VIS platform motion while considering stability. The coupled dynamics requirement was met by the VIS simulation incorporating time-dependent human mass properties atop the platform and driven by the inertial forces from the prescribed subject motion relative to the platform based on motion-capture recorded human trajectories in 1g on a stationary E4D [2]. To analyze simulation results, a stability criterion was also needed. We do not know how to account for the human ‘control system’ that would take visual and vestibular cues as inputs as the platform moves in 0g. We thus chose to follow an approach we had previously used to analyze the dynamic feasibility of performing a task in lunar gravity along the human body trajectory recorded in 1g [3]. In this approach, one analyzes the center of pressure (COP) between the shoes and the ground (or platform) and checks if the COP remains within the convex hull of the footprints on the ground (or platform), commonly referred to as base of support (BOS). Since pressure is vertical and, in the absence of foot restraints, positive, the COP going outside the BOS indicates that the trajectory recorded in 1g is not dynamically feasible in microgravity and/or on the moving platform of the device. The outcome of the COP-based analysis was that some of the key exercises, especially the deadlift and the back squat exercises, were found to be dynamically feasible for at least some number of the exercise cycles, this number increasing with the cable tension. While this type of stability analysis does not account for the likely alteration of the exercise trajectory from its 1g form in space, it does show that there exist at least some realistic trajectories that pass the dynamic feasibility criterion. This adds confidence that, with further adjustment by the subject of the exercise form in 0g on a moving device, a number of exercises can be performed without losing balance.

D Frenkel↗
NASA NTRS2007

Analytical Approach for Estimating Preliminary Mass of ARES I Crew Launch Vehicle Upper Stage Structural Components

In January 2004, President Bush gave the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) a vision for Space Exploration by setting our sight on a bold new path to go back to the Moon, then to Mars and beyond. In response to this vision, NASA started the Constellation Program, which is a new exploration launch vehicle program. The primary mission for the Constellation Program is to carry out a series of human expeditions ranging from Low Earth Orbit to the surface of Mars and beyond for the purposes of conducting human exploration of space, as specified by the Vision for Space Exploration (VSE). The intent is that the information and technology developed by this program will provide the foundation for broader exploration activities as our operational experience grows. The ARES I Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) has been designated as the launch vehicle that will be developed as a "first step" to facilitate the aforementioned human expeditions. The CLV Project is broken into four major elements: First Stage, Upper Stage Engine, Upper Stage (US), and the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV). NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) is responsible for the design of the CLV and has the prime responsibility to design the upper stage of the vehicle. The US is the second propulsive stage of the CLV and provides CEV insertion into low Earth orbit (LEO) after separation from the First Stage of the Crew Launch Vehicle. The fully integrated Upper Stage is a mix of modified existing heritage hardware (J-2X Engine) and new development (primary structure, subsystems, and avionics). The Upper Stage assembly is a structurally stabilized cylindrical structure, which is powered by a single J-2X engine which is developed as a separate Element of the CLV. The primary structure includes the load bearing liquid hydrogen (LH2) and liquid oxygen (LOX) propellant tanks, a Forward Skirt, the Intertank structure, the Aft Skirt and the Thrust Structure. A Systems Tunnel, which carries fluid and electrical power functions to other Elements of the CLV, is included as secondary structure. The MSFC has an overall responsibility for the integrated US element as well as structural design an thermal control of the fuel tanks, intertank, interstage, avionics, main propulsion system, Reaction Control System (RCS) for both the Upper Stage and the First Stage. MSFC's Spacecraft and Vehicle Department, Structural and Analysis Design Division is developing a set of predicted mass of these elements. This paper details the methodology, criterion and tools used for the preliminary mass predictions of the upper stage structural assembly components. In general, weight of the cylindrical barrel sections are estimated using the commercial code Hypersizer, whereas, weight of the domes are developed using classical solutions. HyperSizer is software that performs automated structural analysis and sizing optimization based on aerospace methods for strength, stability, and stiffness. Analysis methods range from closed form, traditional hand calculations repeated every day in industry to more advanced panel buckling algorithms. Margin-of-safety reporting for every potential failure provides the engineer with a powerful insight into the structural problem. Optimization capabilities include finding minimum weight panel or beam concepts, material selections, cross sectional dimensions, thicknesses, and lay-ups from a library of 40 different stiffened and sandwich designs and a database of composite, metallic, honeycomb, and foam materials. Multiple different concepts (orthogrid, isogrid, and skin stiffener) were run for multiple loading combinations of ascent design load with and with out tank pressure as well as proof pressure condition. Subsequently, selected optimized concept obtained from Hypersizer runs was translated into a computer aid design (CAD) model to account for the wall thickness tolerance, weld land etc for developing the most probable weight of the components. The flow diram summarizes the analysis steps used in developing these predicted mass.

Aggarwal, Pravin↗
NASA NTRS2020

Lunar Transient Accelerations White Paper

Recently, the United States announced a plan to return astronauts to the moon by 2024 [8]. Lunar landing (and subsequent Mars landing) architecture was not considered when the current NASA standards and vehicle design requirements for crew injury risk were developed. Therefore a gap exists in protecting the crew in planetary landing scenarios. One of the interesting aspects of this design reference mission (DRM)is the consideration of having the crew stand during dynamic phases of flight. Although this approach was contemplated for the Apollo Lunar Module, current NASA standards do not address design solutions that allow the crew to stand. Currently, NASA uses several tools and associated limits to mitigate crew injury because of dynamic loads. Some of these tools are the Brinkley Dynamic Response Criterion (BDRC) model and Hybrid III Anthropomorphic Test Devices (ATDs) [10]; and these have several limitations for assessing spaceflight loading environments, as well as specific underlying assumptions that may not be applicable in planetary landing vehicles. The BDRC is a simple lumped mass parameter model developed by the U.S. military, and has been used primarily to evaluate injury risk associated with aircraft ejection systems. The model evaluates seat accelerations in each axis to determine injury risk. Because the model treats the human-seat-restraint system as a single system, it is contingent on a restraint system and seat with similar characteristics of the original test data underlying the model. In particular, the model requires a rigid seat with a minimum natural frequency of 15Hz, minimal seat pan padding, side supports, and multipoint harness. The BDRC model uses undamped natural frequency and damping coefficients based on these requirements and any deviations may render the model injury predictions void. In lunar landing, one expects that a minimal or even no seat with minimal restraints will be employed. In this case, the original model parameters are likely to not be applicable. For capsule-based spacecraft returning crew to Earth, the Hybrid III ATD in various sizes also is used to supplement the BDRC. This analytical tool was added to address limitations in the BDRC related to spacecraft landings while wearing a pressure garment and helmet. Although the Hybrid III ATD has additional measurement capability; head, neck,and lumbar spine responses were the only metrics included because of the limitations imposed by the model.Lunar landing acceleration limits must assume the crew is standing during landing, an orientation for which we have limited data.Although the Apollo missions did employ a standing orientation for the crew, much of the data is lost. Therefore data from othersources havebeen examined to inform lunar landing acceleration limits.

Jeffrey T Somers↗