Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “and testing”

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 1,747 records · Page 97
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2018

Advanced Vehicle Testing and Evaluation Final Technical Report Encompassing Project Activities From October 1, 2011 to April 30, 2018

The Advanced Vehicle Testing and Evaluation (AVTE) project incorporated the conduct of advanced technology vehicle and infrastructure testing in the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Advanced Vehicle Testing Activity (AVTA). It was the only activity tasked by DOE to conduct independent field evaluations of vehicle technologies that use advanced technology systems and subsystems in vehicles that reduce petroleum consumption. The results are available through reports published on the AVTA website at http://avt.inl.gov/. The AVTE project provided insight into advanced vehicle technology's long-term performance, durability, maintenance, and lifecycle costs that cannot be found elsewhere. The site is a resource for DOE stakeholders and the public to gain knowledge on advanced technology vehicle progress and innovation. Vehicles tested included light and heavy-duty vehicles with conventional, hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and all-electric propulsion systems. Vehicles were tested on closed tracks and chassis dynamometers, as well as operated on public roads, in fleet operations, and over prescribed routes. All testing was controlled by procedures developed specifically to support such testing. Testing and evaluations were conducted in the following phases: Development and refinement of test procedures, which established testing procedures; Baseline performance testing, which established a performance baseline; Accelerated reliability testing, which determined vehicle reliability; Fleet testing, used to evaluate vehicle economics in fleet operation, and End of test performance evaluation. Test results from all aspects of testing were posted by Idaho National Laboratory (INL) to their website. This final report documents work conducted for the entirety of contract DE-EE0005501 by Intertek Testing Services NA, Inc. (Intertek). The contract was performed from October 1, 2011 through April 30, 2018, and includes 18 amendments to the original award with the most recent Amendment 18 dated March 28, 2018. The final budget for the AVTE project totaled 20,220,873 dollars. As a cooperative agreement, Intertek was obligated to provide cost share of 4,044,175 dollars, leaving 16,176,698 dollars as the Federal share of the agreement. Actual total expenditure for the AVTE project was 20,286,850 dollars. The full 16,176,698 dollars Federal share was expended and 4,110,152 dollars of cost share was provided by Intertek. This resulted in an over-share of 65,977 dollars. There were 106 light-duty on-road vehicles vehicles tested in both fleet and accelerated reliability testing. One additional vehicle was rented to obtain performance testing only. Three heavy-duty truck and trailer combinations were tested as part of the semi-autonomous driving with heavy-duty vehicles in a platoon. Overall project scope and direction was determined between Intertek, DOE, and technical teams from Idaho National Laboratory (INL), Argonne National Laboratory (ANL), and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). The project was administered by the DOE’s National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
NASA NTRS1991

Lightning testing at the subsystem level

Testing at the subsystem or black box level for lightning hardness is required if system hardness is to be assured at the system level. The often applied philosophy of lighting testing only at the system level leads to extensive end of the line design changes which result in excessive costs and time delays. In order to perform testing at the subsystem level two important factors must be defined to make the testing simulation meaningful. The first factor is the definition of the test stimulus appropriate to the subsystem level. Application of system level stimulations to the subsystem level usually leads to significant overdesign of the subsystem which is not necessary and may impair normal subsystem performance. The second factor is the availability of test equipment needed to provide the subsystem level lightning stimulation. Equipment for testing at this level should be portable or at least movable to enable efficient testing in a design laboratory environment. Large fixed test installations for system level tests are not readily available for use by the design engineers at the subsystem level and usually require special operating skills. The two factors, stimulation level and test equipment availability, must be evaluated together in order to produce a practical, workable test standard. The neglect or subordination of either factor will guarantee failure in generating the standard. It is not unusual to hear that test standards or specifications are waived because a specified stimulation level cannot be accomplished by in-house or independent test facilities. Determination of subsystem lightning simulation level requires a knowledge and evaluation of field coupling modes, peak and median levels of voltages and currents, bandwidths, and repetition rates. Practical limitations on test systems may require tradeoffs in lightning stimulation parameters in order to build practical test equipment. Peak power levels that can be generated at specified bandwidths with standard electrical components must be considered in the design and costing of the test system. Stimulation tests equipment and test methods are closely related and must be considered a test system for lightning simulation. A non-perfect specification that can be reliably and repeatedly applied at the subsystem test level is more desirable than a perfect specification that cannot be applied at all.

Luteran, Frank↗
NASA NTRS1999

Vibration and Acoustic Testing for Mars Micromission Spacecraft

The objective of the Mars Micromission program being managed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) for NASA is to develop a common spacecraft that can carry telecommunications equipment and a variety of science payloads for exploration of Mars. The spacecraft will be capable of carrying robot landers and rovers, cameras, probes, balloons, gliders or aircraft, and telecommunications equipment to Mars at much lower cost than recent NASA Mars missions. The lightweight spacecraft (about 220 Kg mass) will be launched in a cooperative venture with CNES as a TWIN auxiliary payload on the Ariane 5 launch vehicle. Two or more Mars Micromission launches are planned for each Mars launch opportunity, which occur every 26 months. The Mars launch window for the first mission is November 1, 2002 through April 2003, which is planned to be a Mars airplane technology demonstration mission to coincide with the 100 year anniversary of the Kittyhawk flight. Several subsequent launches will create a telecommunications network orbiting Mars, which will provide for continuous communication with lenders and rovers on the Martian surface. Dedicated science payload flights to Mars are slated to start in 2005. This new cheaper and faster approach to Mars exploration calls for innovative approaches to the qualification of the Mars Micromission spacecraft for the Ariane 5 launch vibration and acoustic environments. JPL has in recent years implemented new approaches to spacecraft testing that may be effectively applied to the Mars Micromission. These include 1) force limited vibration testing, 2) combined loads, vibration and modal testing, and 3) direct acoustic testing. JPL has performed nearly 200 force limited vibration tests in the past 9 years; several of the tests were on spacecraft and large instruments, including the Cassini and Deep Space One spacecraft. Force limiting, which measures and limits the spacecraft base reaction force using triaxial force gages sandwiched between the spacecraft and the test fixture, alleviates the severe overtest at spacecraft resonances inherent in rigid fixture vibration tests. It has the distinct advantage over response limiting that the method is not dependent on the accuracy of a detailed dynamic model of the spacecraft. Combined loads, vibration, and modal testing were recently performed on the QuikSCAT spacecraft. The combined tests were performed in a single test setup per axis on a vibration shaker, reducing test time by a factor of two or three. Force gages were employed to measure the true c.g. acceleration of the spacecraft for structural loads verification using a sine burst test, to automatically notch random vibration test input accelerations at spacecraft resonances based on predetermined force limits, and to directly measure modal masses in a base drive modal test. In addition to these combined tests on the shaker, the QuikSCAT spacecraft was subjected to a direct field acoustic test by surrounding the spacecraft, still on the vibration shaker, with rock concert type acoustic speakers. Since the spacecraft contractor does not have a reverberant field acoustic test facility, performing a direct field acoustic test -saved the program nearly two weeks schedule time that would have been required for packing / unpacking and shipping of the spacecraft. This paper discusses the rationale behind and advantages of the above test approaches and provides examples of their actual implementation and comparisons to flight data. The applicability of the test approaches to Mars Micromission spacecraft qualification is discussed.

Kern, Dennis L.↗
DOE OSTI2013

RELAP5-3D Restart and Backup Verification Testing

Existing testing methodology for RELAP5-3D employs a set of test cases collected over two decades to test a variety of code features and run on a Linux or Windows platform. However, this set has numerous deficiencies in terms of code coverage, detail of comparison, running time, and testing fidelity of RELAP5-3D restart and backup capabilities. The test suite covers less than three quarters of the lines of code in the relap directory and just over half those in the environmental library. Even in terms of code features, many are not covered. Moreover, the test set runs many problems long past the point necessary to test the relevant features. It requires standard problems to run to completion. This is unnecessary for features can be tested in a short-running problem. For example, many trips and controls can be tested in the first few time steps, as can a number of fluid flow options. The testing system is also inaccurate. For the past decade, the diffem script has been the primary tool for checking that printouts from two different RELAP5-3D executables agree. This tool compares two output files to verify that all characters are the same except for those relating to date, time and a few other excluded items. The variable values printed on the output file are accurate to no more than eight decimal places. Therefore, calculations with errors in decimal places beyond those printed remain undetected. Finally, fidelity of restart is not tested except in the PVM sub-suite and backup is not specifically tested at all. When a restart is made from any midway point of the base-case transient, the restart must produce the same values. When a backup condition occurs, the code repeats advancements with the same time step. A perfect backup can be tested by forcing RELAP5 to perform a backup by falsely setting a backup condition flag at a user-specified-time. Comparison of the calculations of that run and those produced by the same input w/o the spurious condition should be identical. Backup testing is more difficult the other kinds of testing described above because it requires additional coding to implement. The testing system constructed and described in this document resolves all of these issues. A matrix of test features and short-running cases that exercise them is presented. A small information file that contains sufficient data to verify calculations to the last decimal place and bit is produced. This testing system is used to test base cases (called null testing) as well as restart and backup cases. The programming that implements these new capabilities is presented.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Is the testing effect ready to be put to work? Evidence from the laboratory to the classroom.

The testing effect refers to the benefits to retention that result from structuring learning activities in the form of a test. As educators consider implementing test-enhanced learning paradigms in real classroom environments, we think it is critical to consider how an array of factors affecting test-enhanced learning in laboratory studies bear on test-enhanced learning in real-world classroom environments. As such, this review discusses the degree to which test feedback, test format (of formative tests), number of tests, level of the test questions, timing of tests (relative to initial learning), and retention duration have import for testing effects in ecologically valid contexts (e.g., classroom studies). Attention is also devoted to characteristics of much laboratory testing-effect research that may limit translation to classroom environments, such as the complexity of the material being learned, the value of the testing effect relative to other generative learning activities in classrooms, an educational orientation that favors criterial tests focused on transfer of learning, and online instructional modalities. We consider how student-centric variables present in the classroom (e.g., cognitive abilities, motivation) may have bearing on the effects of testing-effect techniques implemented in the classroom. We conclude that the testing effect is a robust phenomenon that benefits a wide variety of learners in a broad array of learning domains. Still, studies are needed to compare the benefit of testing to other learning strategies, to further characterize how individual differences relate to testing benefits, and to examine whether testing benefits learners at advanced levels.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2019

Component Testing Supporting SHINE Medical Technologies

SHINE is going to be implementing a tritium gas processing system to support their Mo-99 work. They have requested that the Hydrogen Process Group of SRNL does some required testing on the system components before startup. The lab plans on conducting both seismic and valve testing. Test Plan: - Testing 10 1C valves 750,000 cycles or until failure; - Testing intervals will be every couple thousand; - 1C valves will have metal stem tips instead of Polymer due to being in a tritium prone area; - Hope that the valves will still have enough force to create a sufficient seal with metal stem tips; - Goal is for a more cost and space efficient alternative to the 5C valves. Status: - Received half the parts, waiting on the other half due to long procurement times; - Waiting on the LabVIEW program which will perform the testing. Path Forward: - R and DE to change out the stem tips (July 2018); - Assemble Manifold (July 2018); - Perform Testing (August 2018); - Report (September 2018). Since SRNL does not own a shaker table, the test will be conducted at a facility like the NTS Facility in Huntsville, Alabama. Test Plans: - Leak Testing; - Use LabVIEW to monitor for leaks before, during and after seismic testing with an Electronic Pressure Transducer; - If leak is detected, sniff for location using Helium Leak Detector; - Connector Testing; - Use LabVIEW to test for electrical continuity before, during and after seismic testing; - If a connectors continuity is interrupted, further testing will be performed; - Each Pin in faulty connector will be testing to determine specific location of disruption. Path Forward: - Pick a Qualified Vender for testing (July 2018); - Procure the connector plugs (July 2018); - Send components and test plan to facility for testing (August 2018); - Perform Testing (August-September 2018); - Report Results (September 2018)

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
DOE OSTI2022

High-Mileage Courier Fleet Vehicle Laboratory Battery Pack Testing

For one of each of the AVTA's plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, battery electric vehicles, and some hybrid electric vehicles tested in high-mileage courier fleets, the high-voltage traction battery packs were removed from the vehicle and tested at the beginning and end of fleet testing. For some vehicles, batteries also were tested at periodic intervals during fleet testing. Standard reference performance tests were conducted to characterize battery degradation over time. This dataset contains results from two or more rounds of battery tests for 21 distinct year/make/model vehicles (see reference ["INL Advanced Vehicle Testing Activity: On-road Logger and Laboratory Battery Pack Testing Vehicle List"](https://avt.inl.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/reports/DatasetVehicleList.pdf) for full list of vehicles). Each round of battery testing included the "Static Capacity Test" and the "Hybrid Pulse Power Characterization (HPPC) Test", conducted according to test procedures published in the United States Advanced Battery Consortium ["Battery Test Manual For Power-Assist Hybrid Electric Vehicles"](https://www.uscar.org/commands/files_download.php?files_id=57), ["Battery Test Manual For Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles"](https://www.uscar.org/commands/files_download.php?files_id=168), and ["Electric Vehicle Battery Test Procedures Manual"](https://www.uscar.org/commands/files_download.php?files_id=5) prior to the time of testing. These tests were performed by Intertek Testing Services, North America. (This dataset will be shared by API; a small sample of the vehicle battery and test data has been extracted and is available for download while the API is being developed.)

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

High-Mileage Courier Fleet Vehicle Laboratory Battery Pack Testing

For one of each of the AVTA's plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, battery electric vehicles, and some hybrid electric vehicles tested in high-mileage courier fleets, the high-voltage traction battery packs were removed from the vehicle and tested at the beginning and end of fleet testing. For some vehicles, batteries also were tested at periodic intervals during fleet testing. Standard reference performance tests were conducted to characterize battery degradation over time. This dataset contains results from two or more rounds of battery tests for 21 distinct year/make/model vehicles (see reference ["INL Advanced Vehicle Testing Activity: On-road Logger and Laboratory Battery Pack Testing Vehicle List"](https://avt.inl.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/reports/DatasetVehicleList.pdf) for full list of vehicles). Each round of battery testing included the "Static Capacity Test" and the "Hybrid Pulse Power Characterization (HPPC) Test", conducted according to test procedures published in the United States Advanced Battery Consortium ["Battery Test Manual For Power-Assist Hybrid Electric Vehicles"](https://www.uscar.org/commands/files_download.php?files_id=57), ["Battery Test Manual For Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles"](https://www.uscar.org/commands/files_download.php?files_id=168), and ["Electric Vehicle Battery Test Procedures Manual"](https://www.uscar.org/commands/files_download.php?files_id=5) prior to the time of testing. These tests were performed by Intertek Testing Services, North America. This dataset is shared by API; a small sample of the vehicle battery and test data has been extracted and is also available for download.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2018

BOP-301 and BOP-302R: Test Definitions and Analyses

Following the conclusion of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) coordinated research project (CRP) on analysis of two EBR-II tests, Argonne has continued its EBR-II analysis with additional tests from the Shutdown Heat Removal Test (SHRT) series. The tests selected for this follow-up analysis are BOP-301 and BOP-302R, two unprotected loss of heat of sink tests in which the intermediate sodium pump tripped without scramming the control rods or tripping the primary pumps. The IAEA CRP focused on the SHRT-17 and SHRT-45R tests, the most severe protected and unprotected loss of flow tests performed during the SHRT series. With the primary pumps tripping, flow rates decreased to levels where flowmeter uncertainty was very high. Accurately capturing the progressions of the two tests despite this uncertainty was one of the key modeling and simulation challenges during the CRP. BOP-301 and BOP-302R were selected because the primary sodium pumps did not trip for those tests. Primary flow rate measurements are known with greater certainty. Power and temperature discrepancies can be explored without concern that flow predictions match test measurements but not the actual flow rates from the tests. These two tests were performed during the same test window as SHRT-45R and had the same core load configuration. Therefore, core models created for analysis of SHRT-45R were easily adapted for analysis of BOP-301 and BOP-302R. Another reason for analyzing BOP-301 and BOP-302R is to analyze tests in which the core inlet temperature changed significantly, which did not occur during the loss of flow tests. The transient progression of the unprotected SHRT-45R test was driven by a decreasing core flow rate while the core inlet temperature remained relatively constant. For the BOP tests, the transient progression was driven by an increasing core inlet temperature while the core flow rate was stable. This report defines the BOP-301 and BOP-302R tests and provides a selection of measured test data. Initial predictions from SAS4A/SASSYS-1 simulations of these tests are then presented. Following these simulations, additional analysis was performed with the Dakota uncertainty quantification and optimization toolkit to determine which parameters have the greater impact on the transient results and the optimal values of the most important parameters.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2020

In-Sodium Testing of a Prototype Thermoacoustic Power Sensor for Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactors

The ultimate goal of this project is to develop and demonstrate a thermoacoustic power sensor (TAPS) for Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactors (SFRs), with potential application also envisioned to other nuclear technologies such as Lead-Cooled Fast Reactors (LFRs), Molten Salt Reactors (MSRs), in addition to Light Water Reactors (LWRs). The project was led by Westinghouse Electric Company, LLC (Westinghouse) and carried out in collaboration with Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) and the University of Pittsburgh. A TAPS is a passive (self-powered), non-invasive (wireless) sensor envisioned for measuring key parameters, such as local temperature and neutron flux, in a nuclear reactor core. The sensor generates pressure waves (i.e., sound waves) with a frequency and amplitude dependent upon nuclear operating conditions (coolant temperature or power changes). The acoustic waves are able to travel through the core and associated structures, and reach to the sensor network placed outside and/or inside of the reactor vessel. These sensors require a very small amount of power which, during loss of power events, can be provided, for example, by harvesting gamma radiation energy, thus resulting in a monitoring system that can function both during normal operation and during loss of power events. Westinghouse and the University of Pittsburgh designed and fabricated TAPS prototypes for Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) to carry out in-sodium testing to evaluate the effects of sodium on the TAPS and the performance of the TAPS technique in sodium. Argonne received a TAPS prototype from Westinghouse, and the prototype was modified such that it can be installed into a test vessel and function in sodium at elevated temperature without potentially leaking. A water mockup test apparatus was constructed to validate proper working of the prototype. An instrumentation and control (I&C) system, running on the National Instruments (NI) LabView platform, was developed to: 1) operate both the water mockup test and the in-sodium test facility; and 2) process and analyze the received acoustic signals from an array of accelerometers and the Argonne sodium-submersible high-temperature acoustic sensor. The prototype was successfully tested in a water bath at different temperatures. Water mockup tests demonstrated that the TAPS prototype is working properly and its resonance frequency changes linearly with the coolant (water) temperature. A TAPS test apparatus was constructed and integrated with the upgraded Under-Sodium Viewing (USV) sodium test facility. The integrated USV-TAPS sodium test facility has been operational. The TAPS prototype and a high-temperature sodium-submersible acoustic sensor (SSAS) developed by Argonne were both installed inside the TAPS test vessel. Being operated within argon cover gas under ambient conditions, the TAPS prototype demonstrated that it was functioning properly with a resonance frequency at 1407.2 Hz, which was successfully detected by the accelerometers mounted on the external wall of the vessel and the high-temperature SSAS installed inside the vessel. After successfully transferring sodium into the vessel, in-sodium tests of the prototype were conducted. Tests of the TAPS prototype demonstrated that the resonance frequency of the TAPS changes linearly with respect to the temperature difference between the interior of the TAPS and bulk sodium. The early tests showed that the TAPS prototype could not establish a continuous and consistent resonance in sodium. The resonance diminished before the prototype reached its operating temperature. A signal postprocessor was added to the DAQ module latterly to isolate interferences, enhance signal conditioning, improve peak detection, and generate resonance frequency versus temperature plots. After testing in molten sodium and immersion at higher temperature for several weeks, the TAPS prototype was able to establish a continuous resonance. Performance evaluation of the TAPS prototype was then conducted in sodium. The tests included the investigation of 1) the effects of the temperature difference between the TAPS and bulk sodium, 2) the effects of sodium flowrate; and 3) the performance of the different sensor-receiver systems positioned inside or outside the vessel. Results of a test demonstrated that, with limited sodium circulation, a continuous and consistent resonance of the TAPS prototype was established occasionally. The tests also demonstrated that, because of the nature of detection principles and mounting methods, the high temperature SSAS is more affected by acoustic noise, while accelerometers are more affected by vibrations, in the test environment. It is unknown why the TAPS prototype only occasionally established a continuous and consistent resonance when the TAPS temperature reached its operating temperature in molten sodium, and why it ultimately failed to resonate at all. A failure modes assessment was conducted and a few potential causes of failure were identified. Different post in-sodium tests were conducted to obtain additional information potentially relevant to the cause of the failure. Nondestructive evaluation techniques are suggested to examine the internal integrity as well as the gas mixture of the prototype. If they prove inconclusive, the prototype should be cut open to conduct a thorough inspection of its internal integrity and determine the state of the gas mixture.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
NASA NTRS1998

Spread Spectrum Receiver Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) Test Guide

The objective of this test guide is to document appropriate unit level test methods and techniques for the performance of EMI testing of Direct Sequence (DS) spread spectrum receivers. Consideration of EMI test methods tailored for spread spectrum receivers utilizing frequency spreading, techniques other than direct sequence (such as frequency hopping, frequency chirping, and various hybrid methods) is beyond the scope of this test guide development program and is not addressed as part of this document EMI test requirements for NASA programs are primarily developed based on the requirements contained in MIL-STD-46 1 D (or earlier revisions of MIL-STD-46 1). The corresponding test method guidelines for the MIL-STD-461 D tests are provided in MIL-STD-462D. These test methods are well documented with the exception of the receiver antenna port susceptibility tests (intermodulation, cross modulation, and rejection of undesired signals) which must be tailored to the specific type of receiver that is being tested. Thus, test methods addressed in this guide consist only of antenna port tests designed to evaluate receiver susceptibility characteristics. MIL-STD-462D should be referred for guidance pertaining to test methods for EMI tests other than the antenna port tests. The scope of this test guide includes: (1) a discussion of generic DS receiver performance characteristics; (2) a summary of S-band TDRSS receiver operation; (3) a discussion of DS receiver EMI susceptibility mechanisms and characteristics; (4) a summary of military standard test guidelines; (5) recommended test approach and methods; and (6) general conclusions and recommendations for future studies in the area of spread spectrum receiver testing.

Wheeler, M. L.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Test Cases for the Benchmark Active Controls: Spoiler and Control Surface Oscillations and Flutter

As a portion of the Benchmark Models Program at NASA Langley, a simple generic model was developed for active controls research and was called BACT for Benchmark Active Controls Technology model. This model was based on the previously-tested Benchmark Models rectangular wing with the NACA 0012 airfoil section that was mounted on the Pitch and Plunge Apparatus (PAPA) for flutter testing. The BACT model had an upper surface spoiler, a lower surface spoiler, and a trailing edge control surface for use in flutter suppression and dynamic response excitation. Previous experience with flutter suppression indicated a need for measured control surface aerodynamics for accurate control law design. Three different types of flutter instability boundaries had also been determined for the NACA 0012/PAPA model, a classical flutter boundary, a transonic stall flutter boundary at angle of attack, and a plunge instability near M = 0.9. Therefore an extensive set of steady and control surface oscillation data was generated spanning the range of the three types of instabilities. This information was subsequently used to design control laws to suppress each flutter instability. There have been three tests of the BACT model. The objective of the first test, TDT Test 485, was to generate a data set of steady and unsteady control surface effectiveness data, and to determine the open loop dynamic characteristics of the control systems including the actuators. Unsteady pressures, loads, and transfer functions were measured. The other two tests, TDT Test 502 and TDT Test 5 18, were primarily oriented towards active controls research, but some data supplementary to the first test were obtained. Dynamic response of the flexible system to control surface excitation and open loop flutter characteristics were determined during Test 502. Loads were not measured during the last two tests. During these tests, a database of over 3000 data sets was obtained. A reasonably extensive subset of the data sets from the first two tests have been chosen for Test Cases for computational comparisons concentrating on static conditions and cases with harmonically oscillating control surfaces. Several flutter Test Cases from both tests have also been included. Some aerodynamic comparisons with the BACT data have been made using computational fluid dynamics codes at the Navier-Stokes level (and in the accompanying chapter SC). Some mechanical and active control studies have been presented. In this report several Test Cases are selected to illustrate trends for a variety of different conditions with emphasis on transonic flow effects. Cases for static angles of attack, static trailing-edge and upper-surface spoiler deflections are included for a range of conditions near those for the oscillation cases. Cases for trailing-edge control and upper-surface spoiler oscillations for a range of Mach numbers, angle of attack, and static control deflections are included. Cases for all three types of flutter instability are selected. In addition some cases are included for dynamic response measurements during forced oscillations of the controls on the flexible mount. An overview of the model and tests is given, and the standard formulary for these data is listed. Some sample data and sample results of calculations are presented. Only the static pressures and the first harmonic real and imaginary parts of the pressures are included in the data for the Test Cases, but digitized time histories have been archived. The data for the Test Cases are also available as separate electronic files.

Bennett, Robert M.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Development and Implementation of NASA's Lead Center for Rocket Propulsion Testing

With the new millennium, NASA's John C. Stennis Space Center (SSC) continues to develop and refine its role as rocket test service provider for NASA and the Nation. As Lead Center for Rocket Propulsion Testing (LCRPT), significant progress has been made under SSC's leadership to consolidate and streamline NASA's rocket test infrastructure and make this vital capability truly world class. NASA's Rocket Propulsion Test (RPT) capability consists of 32 test positions with a replacement value in excess of $2B. It is dispersed at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), Johnson Space Center (JSC)-White Sands Test Facility (WSTF), Glenn Research Center (GRC)-Plum Brook (PB), and SSC and is sized appropriately to minimize duplication and infrastructure costs. The LCRPT also provides a single integrated point of entry into NASA's rocket test services. The RPT capability is managed through the Rocket Propulsion Test Management Board (RPTMB), chaired by SSC with representatives from each center identified above. The Board is highly active, meeting weekly, and is key to providing responsive test services for ongoing operational and developmental NASA and commercial programs including Shuttle, Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle, and 2nd and 3rd Generation Reusable Launch Vehicles. The relationship between SSC, the test provider, and the hardware developers, like MSFC, is critical to the implementation of the LCRPT. Much effort has been expended to develop and refine these relationships with SSC customers. These efforts have met with success and will continue to be a high priority to SSC for the future. To data in the exercise of its role, the LCRPT has made 22 test assignments and saved or avoided approximately $51M. The LCRPT directly manages approximately $30M annually in test infrastructure costs including facility maintenance and upgrades, direct test support, and test technology development. This annual budges supports rocket propulsion test programs which have an annual budget in excess of $150M. As the LCRPT continues to develop, customer responsiveness and lower cost test services will be major themes. In that light, SSC is embarking on major test technology development activities ensuring long range goals of safer, more responsive, and more cost effective test services are realized. The LCRPT is also focusing on the testing requirements for advanced propulsion systems. This future planning is key to defining and fielding the ability to test these new technologies in support of the hardware developers.

Dawson, Michael C.↗
NASA NTRS2005

A High-power Electric Propulsion Test Platform in Space

This paper will describe the results of the preliminary phase of a NASA design study for a facility to test high-power electric propulsion systems in space. The results of this design study are intended to provide a firm foundation for subsequent detailed design and development activities leading to the deployment of a valuable space facility. The NASA Exploration Systems Mission Directorate is sponsoring this design project. A team from the NASA Johnson Space Center, Glenn Research Center, the Marshall Space Flight Center and the International Space Station Program Office is conducting the project. The test facility is intended for a broad range of users including government, industry and universities. International participation is encouraged. The objectives for human and robotic exploration of space can be accomplished affordably, safely and effectively with high-power electric propulsion systems. But, as thruster power levels rise to the hundreds of kilowatts and up to megawatts, their testing will pose stringent and expensive demands on existing Earth-based vacuum facilities. These considerations and the human access to near-Earth space provided by the International Space Station (ISS) have led to a renewed interest in space testing. The ISS could provide an excellent platform for a space-based test facility with the continuous vacuum conditions of the natural space environment and no chamber walls to modify the open boundary conditions of the propulsion system exhaust. The test platform could take advantage of the continuous vacuum conditions of the natural space environment. Space testing would provide open boundary conditions without walls, micro-gravity and a realistic thermal environment. Testing on the ISS would allow for direct observation of the test unit, exhaust plume and space-plasma interactions. When necessary, intervention by on-board personnel and post-test inspection would be possible. The ISS can provide electrical power, a location for diagnostic instruments, data handling and thermal control. The platform will be designed to accommodate the side-by-side testing of multiple types of electric thrusters. It is intended to be a permanent facility in which different thrusters can be tested over time. ISS crews can provide maintenance for the platform and change out thruster test units as needed. The primary objective of this platform is to provide a test facility for electric propulsion devices of interest for future exploration missions. These thrusters are expected to operate in the range of hundreds of kilowatts and above. However, a platform with this capability could also accommodate testing of thrusters that require much lower power levels. Testing at the higher power levels would be accomplished by using power fiom storage devices on the platform, which would be gradually recharged by the ISS power generation system. This paper will summarize the results of the preliminary phase of the study with an explanation of the user requirements and the initial conceptual design. The concept for test operations will also be described. The NASA project team is defining the requirements but they will also reflect the inputs of the broader electric propulsion community including those at universities, commercial enterprises and other government laboratories. As a facility on the International Space Station, the design requirements are also intended to encompass the needs of international users. Testing of electric propulsion systems on the space station will help advance the development of systems needed for exploration and could also serve the needs of other customers. Propulsion systems being developed for commercial and military applications could be tested and certification testing of mature thrusters could be accomplished in the space environment.

Petro, Andrew J.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Testing to Transition the J-2X from Paper to Hardware

The J-2X Upper Stage Engine (USE) will be the first new human-rated upper stage engine since the Apollo program of the 1960s. It is designed to carry the Ares I and Ares V into orbit and send the Ares V to the Moon as part of NASA's Constellation Program. This paper will provide an overview of progress on the design, testing, and manufacturing of this new engine in 2009 and 2010. The J-2X embodies the program goals of basing the design on proven technology and experience and seeking commonality between the Ares vehicles as a way to minimize risk, shorten development times, and live within current budget constraints. It is based on the proven J-2 engine used on the Saturn IB and Saturn V launch vehicles. The prime contractor for the J-2X is Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne (PWR), which is under a design, development, test, and engineering (DDT&E) contract covering the period from June 2006 through September 2014. For Ares I, the J-2X will provide engine start at approximately 190,000 feet, operate roughly 500 seconds, and shut down. For Ares V, the J-2X will start at roughly 190,000 feet to place the Earth departure stage (EDS) in orbit, shut down and loiter for up to five days, re-start on command and operate for roughly 300 seconds at its secondary power level to perform trans lunar injection (TLI), followed by final engine shutdown. The J-2X development effort focuses on four key areas: early risk mitigation, design risk mitigation, component and subassembly testing, and engine system testing. Following that plan, the J-2X successfully completed its critical design review (CDR) in 2008, and it has made significant progress in 2009 and 2010 in moving from the drawing board to the machine shop and test stand. Post-CDR manufacturing is well under way, including PWR in-house and vendor hardware. In addition, a wide range of component and sub-component tests have been completed, and more component tests are planned. Testing includes heritage powerpack, turbopump inducer water flow, turbine air flow, turbopump seal testing, main injector and gas generator, injector testing, augmented spark igniter testing, nozzle side loads cold flow testing, nozzle extension film cooling flow testing, control system testing with hardware in the loop, and nozzle extension emissivity coating tests. In parallel with hardware manufacturing, work is progressing on the new A-3 test stand to support full duration altitude testing. The Stennis A-2 test stand is scheduled to be turned over to the Constellation Program in September 2010 to be modified for J-2X testing also. As the structural steel was rising on the A-3 stand, work was under way in the nearby E complex on the chemical steam generator and subscale diffuser concepts to be used to evacuate the A-3 test cell and simulate altitude conditions.

Byrd, Tom↗
NASA NTRS2016

Additive Manufacturing, Design, Testing, and Fabrication: A Full Engineering Experience at JSC

I worked on several projects this term. While most projects involved additive manufacturing, I was also involved with two design projects, two testing projects, and a fabrication project. The primary mentor for these was Richard Hagen. Secondary mentors were Hai Nguyen, Khadijah Shariff, and fabrication training from James Brown. Overall, my experience at JSC has been successful and what I have learned will continue to help me in my engineering education and profession long after I leave. My 3D printing projects ranged from less than a 1 cubic centimeter to about 1 cubic foot and involved several printers using different printing technologies. It was exciting to become familiar with printing technologies such as industrial grade FDM (Fused Deposition Modeling), the relatively new SLA (Stereolithography), and PolyJet. My primary duty with the FDM printers was to model parts that came in from various sources to print effectively and efficiently. Using methods my mentor taught me and the Stratasys Insight software, I was able to minimize imperfections, hasten build time, improve strength for specific forces (tensile, shear, etc...), and reduce likelihood of a print-failure. Also using FDM, I learned how to repair a part after it was printed. This is done by using a special kind of glue that chemically melts the two faces of plastic parts together to form a fused interface. My first goal with SLA technology was to bring the printer back to operational readiness. In becoming familiar with the Pegasus SLA printer, I researched the leveling, laser settings, and different vats to hold liquid material. With this research, I was successfully able to bring the Pegasus back online and have successfully printed multiple sample parts as well as functional parts. My experience with PolyJet technology has been focused on an understanding of the abilities/limits, costs, and the maintenance for daily use. Still upcoming will be experience with using a composite printer that uses FDM technology to print plastic while laying an internal filament of Kevlar or carbon-fiber inside the printed material. It has been incredible being exposed to this range of technologies and I feel very fortunate to be ready for virtually any kind of printing technology I come across in the future. Design work played a part in my internship this term as well. Working with Hai Nguyen, I was able to design a set of testing tips and a test frame for use with an Arcjet. The testing tips will be made of several different materials that will possibly be used in the heat shield of the Orion space craft. These designs included technical drawings that were presented to the fabrication shop. The frame design was created from 80/20 (a popular brand of frame construction equipment) and included an order form with pricing for fabrication. An independent design was also done for the virtual reality lab. This design was to create a hand-controller based on a previous design. This final design was sent directly to a 3D printer without technical drawings. Overall, my design work has given me experience with using 80/20, helped improve my CAD (Computer Aided Design) proficiency, and increased my knowledge of how to set up technical drawings for fabrication. The final role I have played in this internship has been to assist with testing of the inflatable technology materials working Khadijah Shariff. I began the internship assisting with permeability testing with the initial plan to continue the testing independently after training. Unfortunately, the testing apparatus suffered a technical failure and had funding pulled which cancelled that portion of the project. Further testing with inflatable technology continued with tensile testing of various stitching methods. This testing took place over a two-days and concluded successfully. Final testing was to be more tensile testing but of straps used to connect various inflatable sections. Unfortunately, the needed grips for the tensile tests could not be located and put the testing on hold. It is possible this round of testing will still take place by the end of the internship if the grips can be found. Overall, this portion of the internship has helped me become familiar with one kind of permeability test as well as a popular tensile/compression testing machine. Finally, I also had the chance to be trained using a metal lathe for making very small tips for a soldering iron. These tips will be used to melt threaded brass inserts into 3D printed plastic. Working with James Brown, I was able to successfully machine a brass rod down to as little as 0.064 inches plus or minus 0.001 inches. It was very rewarding to learn how to best use the machine and become familiar with a skill that will undoubtedly be used again in the future. I have been told by several professional engineers that learning to use a lathe and mill will be invaluable skills in the field. This knocks 50 percent of that goal off and I look forward to learning the mill at some point in the future. As is apparent with this list of projects, my internship was not focused on a single over-arching goal. Instead, I was able to gain experience in a myriad of very different areas. I feel like my time here was spent bouncing from one project to the next. Though sometimes difficult to switch gears, it was very rewarding to be a part of so much in so little time. My career and education will be positively impacted by what I have learned at JSC. My experience with 3D printing has improved my ability to handle many issues that may come up in the future with multiple different technologies. The design work I took part in, especially creating technical drawings, will help me better present designs to any engineer or shop I will encounter. My testing experience has helped me become familiar with a popular kind of tensile test machine that will likely be similar to the kinds I will encounter in the future. Finally, my experience with fabrication has given me a rare opportunity, as an engineer, to take part in the fabrication of a part. This experience will help me better tailor my future designs for the manufacturing process and has given me an appreciation for detailed/delicate machining work. My experience at JSC has been successful and will continue to assist me for a long time within the engineering field.

Zusack, Steven↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Evaluation of Extended Reality Technologies for Use in Verification Testing at NASA 2024 HRP IWS Abstract

BACKGROUND At NASA, verification testing is the formal process of ensuring that a product conforms to requirements set by a project or program. Some verification methods, such as Demonstrations and Test, require either the end product or a mockup of the product with sufficient fidelity to stand-in for the product during the test. Traditionally, these mockups have been physical (e.g., foam-core and wood) but there is growing interest in exploring new methods for testing with these mockups. These methods include virtual reality (VR), mixed reality, and augmented reality which are collectively referred to as eXtended Reality (XR) technologies. VR has already been adopted and used by many in the aerospace industry as a tool for use in early design phases (e.g., developmental testing) and may have the most potential for use in verification tests. Benefits of using VR mockups offer cost effectiveness, ease of iteration, simulation of hazardous conditions (e.g., an egress through a hatch with smoke obscuring vision), and the ability to simulate microgravity conditions, which are challenging to do with physical mockups. However, the validity of test results obtained from VR mockup demonstrations or testing, compared to the current gold standard of physical mockups, remains uncertain. It is unlikely that there is one clean answer as there are many different types of verification outcomes and each XR technology must be evaluated on its own merits. This is not an issue during developmental testing as the design is still in flux and the total success of the design is not dependent upon the results of a developmental test. Verification tests, however, only happen once, assuming no change to the design, and the results are used to certify the product. Therefore, establishing the validity of XR mockup-based verification outcomes is essential before considering them for any use in verification tests. OBJECTIVE AND METHOD To address this concern, the Human Research Program has funded a project to explore and qualify how XR technologies might be used in verification demonstration and testing at NASA. Currently, we are conducting a review of the literature on the utilization of XR mockups for design activities, prototyping, and user testing. We are employing the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) analysis method to identify the pros, cons, and barriers to adoption of XR technologies for verification testing at NASA. Additionally, we are developing a framework to guide the deployment of XR mockups for verification tests. Building upon available evidence from the literature and subject-matter expert feedback, our goal for the framework is to provide guidelines for which forms of XR mockups are suitable for a given verification test, when only physical mockups should be employed and to highlight areas for which more evidence is needed. To further refine our framework and to contribute to the body of evidence, we are planning a lab-based experiment comparing a VR mockup to a physical twin for a set of select verification outcomes. ANTICIPATED RESULTS In this presentation, we will present the work we conducted to evaluate XR technologies for use in verification tests at NASA. We will summarize and report our findings from the SWOT analysis and our lab-based study, and we will present the current state of the XR Technologies for Verification Testing framework. We will conclude by summarizing remaining work and future directions for the project. Technologies for Verification Testing framework. We will conclude by summarizing remaining work and future directions for the project.

Extended Reality↗
DOE OSTI2016

Clemson University Wind Turbine Drivetrain Test Facility

In November of 2009, Clemson University was awarded a competitive grant from the U.S. Department of Energy to design, build and operate a facility for full-scale, highly accelerated mechanical testing of next-generation wind turbine drivetrain technologies. The primary goal of the project was to design, construct, commission, and operate a state-of-the-art sustainable facility that permits full-scale highly accelerated testing of advanced drivetrain systems for large wind turbines. The secondary goal was to meet the objectives of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, especially in job creation, and provide a positive impact on economically distressed areas in the United States, and preservation and economic recovery in an expeditious manner. The project was executed according to a managed cooperative agreement with the Department of Energy and was an extraordinary success. The resultant new facility is located in North Charleston, SC, providing easy transportation access by rail, road or ship and operates on an open access model such that it is available to the U.S. Wind Industry for research, analysis, and evaluation activities. The 72 m by 97 m facility features two mechanical dynamometer test bays for evaluating the torque and blade dynamic forces experienced by the rotors of wind turbine drivetrains. The dynamometers are rated at 7.5 MW and 15 MW of low speed shaft power and are configured as independent test areas capable of simultaneous operation. All six degrees of freedom, three linear and three rotational, for blade and rotor dynamics are replicated through the combination of a drive motor, speed reduction gearbox and a controllable hydraulic load application unit (LAU). This new LAU setup readily supports accelerated lifetime mechanical testing and load analysis for the entire drivetrain system of the nacelle and easily simulates a wide variety of realistic operating scenarios in a controlled laboratory environment. The development of these two dynamometer test rigs is the first significant achievement for the project. These test rigs embody a new manner of test due to the system configuration and completely new design with a free floating loading hub in the LAU. This project provided the catalyst for the advancement to this new test rig configuration that has been adopted by every significant wind turbine test rig constructed since the inception of this project. There are currently two different vendors supplying these new systems. Catalyzing this new design is the second major success of the project. With the increased market penetration of wind energy over the past decade, many regions and countries have developed specific electrical grid specifications and performance codes for large wind farms to ensure operational reliability and stability. These grid codes provide requirements for interconnection with the grid during low or high voltage phenomena, typically encountered during and after system fault events. Given the installed infrastructure of the Wind Turbine Drivetrain Testing Facility (WTDTF), a natural expansion of facility capability was to include the necessary equipment for performing fault ride-through evaluations of wind turbines to the Low Voltage Ride Through (LVRT) codes. Once the decision was made to expand the scope of the original grant into fault ride-through testing, it was clear that there are several markets, not just wind, which could benefit from this type of test and that simple fault ride-through testing could be extended into a broader scope of electrical testing capabilities. It was at this point that Clemson University was awarded a second grant to build a 15 MW Hardware-In-the-Loop (HIL) Grid Simulator in order to establish world class electrical testing capabilities to compliment the mechanical testing at the WTDTF. This third significant achievement resulted in the 15 MW HIL Grid Simulator as the corner stone of the Duke Energy eGRID Center and is collocated with the WTDTF in the SCE&G Energy Innovation Center at the new Facility in North Charleston, SC, USA. Before the eGRID was completed, it was recognized that the ability to test solar farm equipment was but a small step away thru the addition of enhanced equipment to provide for DC testing. In yet another expansion/success, a 2.5 MW rectifier system was designed and implemented by Clemson staff to enhance the Center’s capabilities. The program required over 250,000 man-hours of on-site construction labor reworking the brownfield facility on the former Navy Base, clearly satisfying one of the major goals of the Reinvestment Act. This was done while winning numerous awards for design and construction of the facility, including the Top US Project for 2014 from the Trade Journal Engineering News Record. The project was a major collaborative developmental activity managed by Clemson University staff that involved the DOE and many partners and organizations.

17 WIND ENERGY↗