SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
The NASA test airplane, B-52B-008, was a carrier for drop tests of the shuttle booster recovery parachute system. The purpose of the test support by Boeing was to monitor the vertical loads on the pylon hooks. The hooks hold the Drop Test Vehicle to the B-52 pylon during drop test missions. The loads were monitored to assure the successful completion of the flight and the safety of the crew.
The B-52B-008 drop test consisted of one takeoff roll to 60 KCAS, two captive flights to accomplish limited safety of flight flutter and structural demonstration testing, and seven drop test flights. Of the seven drop test missions, one flight was aborted due to the failure of the hook mechanism to release the drop test vehicle (DTV); but the other six flights successfully dropped the DTV.
An air drop test program was conducted as part of the development of a decelerator subsystem for recovering the Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster. This development test program consisted of six drops performed over the period from June 1977 to September 1978 at a parachute test center in California. The testing concerned a 48,000-lb drop test vehicle released from the B-52 mothership. The drop test program is described and pertinent test results are discussed. Data include snatch loads, inflation characteristics, peak inflation and disreef loads, and drag performance. Performance characteristics of the drogue parachute and the main parachute are established.
During 2017, two vertical drop tests were conducted on two partial sections removed from a Fokker F28 MK4000 aircraft as a part of a joint NASA / Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) effort to investigate the crashworthiness characteristics of Transport Category Aircraft, as defined by 14 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 25. The first test was a pure vertical drop test of a relatively uniform forward section, which included an underfloor area for luggage. The second test was a canted drop test onto a sloped surface of a portion of the fuselage representing the wingbox stiffened structure. In both tests, accelerometers were installed on the floor, seat track, luggage, and overhead bin to measure responses in the two airframe sections. In addition, ten Anthropomorphic Test Devices (ATDs, a.k.a. crash test dummies) were included in each test to measure the potential of onboard occupant injury. Self-contained data recorders, logging accelerations and rotational rates, were also used on the seat tracks and lower structure for evaluation as potential crash recording devices in future tests. Finally, the starboard side of each section was painted with a stochastic black and white speckle pattern for use in full field photogrammetric imaging techniques. The results collected show notable differences in the Forward and Wingbox Section responses. The Forward Section floor accelerations showed a relatively uniform response of approximately 7 g throughout the impact event. This section exhibited large amounts of subfloor crushing, floor stiffener failures and seat deformation upon impact. These results are contrasted by the Wingbox Section accelerations, which showed large differences when comparing accelerations recorded from either the rear or the front portion of the section reaching peaks of 39 g in some locations. Additionally, the Wingbox Section test induced a forward motion caused from the rotation at impact. With the exception of the lower cavity, there was minimal deformation in the Wingbox Section, and ATD responses were consistently higher than those for the Forward Section. A complete set of results are presented for the airframe, seat, ATD, overhead bin, and subfloor regions for each section. The ATD results are compared to current injury criteria, and determinations will be made on the likelihood of injury. Additional results for cargo-hold stored luggage are presented in an attempt to provide a component-level characterization for better understanding of under-floor loading. Finally, a discussion of the relevance of the results for a proposed airframe level crashworthiness guideline are presented.
Two drop tests of partial Hawker 4000 fuselage sections were conducted at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Langley Research Center (LaRC) to characterize the response of representative composite aerospace structure to dynamic impact loads. Test conditions were selected to induce damage into the composite structure in order to study material failure within a composite fuselage and evaluate the capability of finite element (FE) model analysis to predict that failure. The tests were simulated using FE models which were generated to isolate the effect of developmental data availability on predictive capability. FE Models of the tested fuselage sections were generated using two limited data sets. The first model configuration was reverse engineered from the test article with no information related to design or fabrication details which would be known only by the manufacturer. The second model was generated from data provided by the manufacturer but without additional material characterization test data. Models were developed using these methodologies for both fuselage sections tested. Correlation of each model to the tests conducted was evaluated in terms of damage, deformation, and cabin acceleration measurements. Correlation between the developed models and the tested fuselage sections showed that the reverse engineered model predicted the composite damage and cabin acceleration measured during test though it was limited due to lack of detail in the composite layup changes through the structure. The model developed using manufacturer specifications did not predict damage, due to limited material and component model characterization data, but it did predict acceleration on par with the reverse engineered model. Model capability and limitation sources identified were verified through correlation of a final model which was developed by combining the individual data sets. The combined model demonstrated that the addition of calibrated composite material models to accurate composite layup definitions and detailed geometry led to improved correlation of damage and acceleration response within the composite fuselage structures.
Two drop tests of partial Hawker 4000 fuselage sections were conducted at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Langley Research Center (LaRC) to characterize the response of representative composite aerospace structure to dynamic impact loads. Test conditions were selected to induce damage into the composite structure in order to study material failure within a composite fuselage and evaluate the capability of finite element (FE) model analysis to predict that failure. The tests were simulated using FE models which were generated to isolate the effect of developmental data availability on predictive capability. FE Models of the tested fuselage sections were generated using two limited data sets. The first model configuration was reverse engineered from the test article with no information related to design or fabrication details which would be known only by the manufacturer. The second model was generated from data provided by the manufacturer but without additional material characterization test data. Models were developed using these methodologies for both fuselage sections tested. Correlation of each model to the tests conducted was evaluated in terms of damage, deformation, and cabin acceleration measurements. Correlation between the developed models and the tested fuselage sections showed that the reverse engineered model predicted the composite damage and cabin acceleration measured during test though it was limited due to lack of detail in the composite layup changes through the structure. The model developed using manufacturer specifications did not predict damage, due to limited material and component model characterization data, but it did predict acceleration on par with the reverse engineered model. Model capability and limitation sources identified were verified through correlation of a final model which was developed by combining the individual data sets. The combined model demonstrated that the addition of calibrated composite material models to accurate composite layup definitions and detailed geometry led to improved correlation of damage and acceleration response within the composite fuselage structures.
The air drop development test program for the Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster Recovery System required the design of a large drop test vehicle that would meet all the stringent requirements placed on it by structural loads, safety considerations, flight recovery system interfaces, and sequence. The drop test vehicle had to have the capability to test the drogue and the three main parachutes both separately and in the total flight deployment sequence and still be low-cost to fit in a low-budget development program. The design to test large ribbon parachutes to loads of 300,000 pounds required the detailed investigation and integration of several parameters such as carrier aircraft mechanical interface, drop test vehicle ground transportability, impact point ground penetration, salvageability, drop test vehicle intelligence, flight design hardware interfaces, and packaging fidelity.
Throughout the Capsule Parachute Assembly System (CPAS) drop test program, the CPAS Analysis Team has developed a simulation and analysis process to support drop test planning and execution. This process includes multiple phases focused on developing test simulations and communicating results to all groups involved in the drop test. CPAS Engineering Development Unit (EDU) series drop test planning begins with the development of a basic operational concept for each test. Trajectory simulation tools include the Flight Analysis and Simulation Tool (FAST) for single bodies, and the Automatic Dynamic Analysis of Mechanical Systems (ADAMS) simulation for the mated vehicle. Results are communicated to the team at the Test Configuration Review (TCR) and Test Readiness Review (TRR), as well as at Analysis Integrated Product Team (IPT) meetings in earlier and intermediate phases of the pre-test planning. The ability to plan and communicate efficiently with rapidly changing objectives and tight schedule constraints is a necessity for safe and successful drop tests.
A 30-ft/s vertical drop test of a fuselage section of a Boeing 737 aircraft was conducted in October of 1999 at the FAA Technical Center in Atlantic City, NJ. This test was performed to evaluate the structural integrity of a conformable auxiliary fuel tank mounted beneath the floor and to determine its effect on the impact response of the airframe structure and the occupants. The test data were used to compare with a finite element simulation of the fuselage structure and to gain a better understanding of the impact physics through analytical/experimental correlation. To perform this simulation, a full-scale 3-dimensional finite element model of the fuselage section was developed using the explicit, nonlinear transient-dynamic finite element code, MSC.Dytran. The emphasis of the simulation was to predict the structural deformation and floor-level acceleration responses obtained from the drop test of the B737 fuselage section with the auxiliary fuel tank.
PFE Auxiliary Systems conducted drop testing on SAVY-4000 containers to evaluate structural response under 12-foot drop conditions. In support of that effort, a finite-element modeling capability was developed to simulate drop response across multiple container sizes and impact orientations. The purpose of this work was to provide a consistent analysis framework that could support interpretation of testing, compare response trends across multiple configurations, and generate quantities of interest for later comparison with experimental data. More broadly, the analysis and testing were intended to assess whether the containers continued to perform their primary function after a 12-foot drop, namely maintaining structural integrity and containment of the contents. The modeling approach combined an implicit preload analysis with an explicit drop simulation so that each drop event began from a mechanically realistic assembled condition, including compression of the silicone O-ring. Separate models were developed for 2-quart, 5-quart, 12-quart, and 10-gallon containers. The results were evaluated in terms of strain-gauge response, collar-lid gap behavior, and accumulated plastic strain. In addition, parametric studies were performed on the 2-quart container to assess sensitivity to O-ring stiffness, friction, canister thickness, geometry tolerance, and mesh density. The simulations showed that predicted drop responses depended strongly on both container size and drop orientation. Gap metrics identified cases in which the predicted collar-lid opening exceeded the nominal O-ring cross-section threshold, while plastic strain metrics identified localized regions of elevated permanent deformation. Parametric studies showed that the predicted response was especially sensitive to the assumed O-ring stiffness and contact friction, while the geometry tolerance study produced smaller changes in the cases examined. The main value of this work was that it established a repeatable modeling and simulation workflow to support drop-test implementation, evaluate effects of future configuration changes, and understand modeling assumptions that most influenced predicted response. At the current stage, the results were viewed as preliminary model predictions rather than validated predictions. The next step would be to compare drop-test data to the model so that predictive values of the workflow could be refined and used with greater confidence to assess whether the containers maintained structural integrity and containment of the contents after a 12-foot drop.
A finite element model of an ATR42-300 commuter-class aircraft was developed and a crash simulation was executed. Analytical predictions were correlated with data obtained from a 30-feet per second (9.14-meters per second) vertical drop test of the aircraft. The purpose of the test was to evaluate the structural response of the aircraft when subjected to a severe, but survivable, impact. The aircraft was configured with seats, dummies, luggage, and other ballast. The wings were filled with 8,700 lb. (3,946 kilograms) of water to represent the fuel. The finite element model, which consisted of 57,643 nodes and 62,979 elements, was developed from direct measurements of the airframe geometry. The seats, dummies, luggage, simulated engines and fuel, and other ballast were represented using concentrated masses. The model was executed in LS-DYNA, a commercial finite element code for performing explicit transient dynamic simulations. Analytical predictions of structural deformation and selected time-history responses were correlated with experimental data from the drop test to validate the simulation.
Transport fuselage section drop tests provided useful information about the crash behavior of metal aircraft in preparation for a full-scale Boeing 720 controlled impact demonstration (CID). The fuselage sections have also provided an operational test environment for the data acquisition system designed for the CID test, and data for analysis and correlation with the DYCAST nonlinear finite-element program. The correlation of the DYCAST section model predictions was quite good for the total fuselage crushing deflection (22 to 24 inches predicted versus 24 to 26 inches measured), floor deformation, and accelerations for the floor and fuselage. The DYCAST seat and occupant model was adequate to approximate dynamic loading to the floor, but a more sophisticated model would be required for good correlation with dummy accelerations. Although a full-section model using only finite elements for the subfloor was desirable, constraints of time and computer resources limited the finite-element subfloor model to a two-frame model. Results from the two-frame model indicate that DYCAST can provide excellent correlation with experimental crash behavior of fuselage structure with a minimum of empirical force-deflection data representing structure in the analytical model.
A 5-ft-diameter composite fuselage section was retrofitted with four identical blocks of deployable honeycomb energy absorber and crash tested on two different surfaces: soft soil, and water. The drop tests were conducted at the 70-ft. drop tower at the Landing and Impact Research (LandIR) Facility of NASA Langley. Water drop tests were performed into a 15-ft-diameter pool of water that was approximately 42-in. deep. For the soft soil impact, a 15-ft-square container filled with fine-sifted, unpacked sand was located beneath the drop tower. All drop tests were vertical with a nominally flat attitude with respect to the impact surface. The measured impact velocities were 37.4, and 24.7-fps for soft soil and water, respectively. A fuselage section without energy absorbers was also drop tested onto water to provide a datum for comparison with the test, which included energy absorbers. In order to facilitate this type of comparison and to ensure fuselage survivability for the no-energy-absorber case, the velocity of the water impact tests was restricted to 25-fps nominal. While all tests described in this paper were limited to vertical impact velocities, the implications and design challenges of utilizing external energy absorbers during combined forward and vertical impact velocities are discussed. The design, testing and selection of a honeycomb cover, which was required in soft surface and water impacts to transmit the load into the honeycomb cell walls, is also presented.
A 5-ft-diameter composite fuselage section was retrofitted with four identical blocks of deployable honeycomb energy absorber and crash tested on two different surfaces: soft soil, and water. The drop tests were conducted at the 70-ft. drop tower at the Landing and Impact Research (LandIR) Facility of NASA Langley. Water drop tests were performed into a 15-ft-diameter pool of water that was approximately 42-in. deep. For the soft soil impact, a 15-ft-square container filled with fine-sifted, unpacked sand was located beneath the drop tower. All drop tests were vertical with a nominally flat attitude with respect to the impact surface. The measured impact velocities were 37.4, and 24.7-fps for soft soil and water, respectively. A fuselage section without energy absorbers was also drop tested onto water to provide a datum for comparison with the test, which included energy absorbers. In order to facilitate this type of comparison and to ensure fuselage survivability for the no-energy-absorber case, the velocity of the water impact tests was restricted to 25-fps nominal. While all tests described in this paper were limited to vertical impact velocities, the implications and design challenges of utilizing external energy absorbers during combined forward and vertical impact velocities are discussed. The design, testing and selection of a honeycomb cover, which was required in soft surface and water impacts to transmit the load into the honeycomb cell walls, is also presented.
In March 2017, a vertical drop test of a forward fuselage section of a Fokker F-28 MK4000 aircraft was conducted as part of a joint NASA/FAA project to investigate the performance of transport aircraft under realistic crash conditions. In June 2017, a vertical drop test was conducted of a wing-box fuselage section of the same aircraft. Both sections were configured with two rows of aircraft seats, in a triple-double configuration. A total of ten Anthropomorphic Test Devices (ATDs) were secured in seats using standard lap belt restraints. The forward fuselage section was also configured with luggage in the cargo hold. Both sections were outfitted with two hat racks, each with added ballast mass. The drop tests were performed at the Landing and Impact Research facility located at NASA Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia. The measured impact velocity for the forward fuselage section was 346.8-in/s onto soil. The wing-box section was dropped with a downward facing pitch angle onto a sloping soil surface in order to create an induced forward acceleration in the airframe. The vertical impact velocity of the wing-box section was 349.2-in/s. A second objective of this project was to assess the capabilities of finite element simulations to predict the test responses. Finite element models of both fuselage sections were developed for execution in LS-DYNA(Registered Trademark), a commercial explicit nonlinear transient dynamic code. The models contained accurate representations of the airframe structure, the hat racks and hat rack masses, the floor and seat tracks, the luggage in the cargo hold for the forward section, and the detailed under-floor structure in the wing-box section. Initially, concentrated masses were used to represent the inertial properties of the seats, restraints, and ATD occupants. However, later simulations were performed that included finite element representations of the seats, restraints, and ATD occupants. These models were developed to more accurately replicate the seat loading of the floor and to enable prediction of occupant impact responses. Models were executed to generate analytical predictions of airframe responses, which were compared with test data to validate the model. Comparisons of predicted and experimental structural deformation and failures were made. Finally, predicted and experimental soil deformation and crater depths were also compared for both drop test configurations.
Though getting astronauts safely into orbit and beyond has long been one of NASA?s chief goals, their safe return has always been equally as important. The Crew Exploration Vehicle?s (CEV) Parachute Assembly System (CPAS) is designed to safely return astronauts to Earth on the next-generation manned spacecraft Orion. As one means for validating this system?s requirements and testing its functionality, a test article known as the Parachute Compartment Drop Test Vehicle (PC-DTV) will carry a fully-loaded yet truncated CPAS Parachute Compartment (PC) in a series of drop tests. Two aerodynamic profiles for the PC-DTV currently exist, though both share the same interior structure, and both have an Orion-representative weight of 20,800 lbf. Two extraction methods have been developed as well. The first (Cradle Monorail System 2 - CMS2) uses a sliding rail technique to release the PC-DTV midair, and the second (Modified DTV Sled; MDS) features a much less constrained separation method though slightly more complex. The decision as to which aerodynamic profile and extraction method to use is still not finalized. Additional CFD and stress analysis must be undertaken in order to determine the more desirable options, though at present the "boat tail" profile and the CMS2 extraction method seem to be the favored options in their respective categories. Fabrication of the PC-DTV and the selected extraction sled is set to begin in early October 2010 with an anticipated first drop test in mid-March 2011.
The Crew Exploration Vehicle Parachute Assembly System (CPAS) is the parachute system for NASA s Orion spacecraft. CPAS is currently in the design and testing phase of development. The test program consists of numerous drop tests, wherein a test article rigged with parachutes is extracted or released from an aircraft. During such tests, range safety is paramount, as is the recoverability of the parachutes and test article. It is crucial to establish an aircraft release point that will ensure that the article and all items released from it will land in safe locations. Early in the CPAS project, a legacy tool (previously used on the X-38 project) was used to determine a safe release point and to predict the landing locations (the footprint) of the payload and all released objects. Due to increasing test complexity and the need for a more flexible tool, a new footprint predictor tool, called Sasquatch, was created in MATLAB. This tool takes in a simulated trajectory for the test article, information about all released objects, and atmospheric wind data (simulated or actual) to calculate the trajectories of the released objects. Dispersions are applied to the landing locations of those objects, taking into account the variability of winds, aircraft release point, and object descent rate. A safe aircraft release point is determined based on the landing locations of the payload and released objects. The release point, landing locations, and dispersions are plotted on a simple map of the drop zone for easy reference. To date, Sasquatch has been used for thirteen drop tests. Comparing the predictions with actual test results has allowed for significant improvements in the tool s predictive capabilities, especially the incorporation of a well-correlated horizontal throw model. Intended future improvements to the tool include tighter dispersions on the landing locations, Monte Carlo capability, direct input from trajectory simulations, and a graphical user interface.
A Boeing 707 fuselage section was drop tested to measure structural, seat, and anthropomorphic dummy response to vertical crash loads. The specimen had nominally zero pitch, roll and yaw at impact with a sink speed of 20 ft/sec. Results from this drop test and other drop tests of different transport sections will be used to prepare for a full-scale crash test of a B-720.