Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “test procedure”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2005

NASA GRC and MSFC Space-Plasma Arc Testing Procedures

Tests of arcing and current collection in simulated space plasma conditions have been performed at the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) in Cleveland, Ohio, for over 30 years and at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) in Huntsville, Alabama, for almost as long. During this period, proper test conditions for accurate and meaningful space simulation have been worked out, comparisons with actual space performance in spaceflight tests and with real operational satellites have been made, and NASA has achieved our own internal standards for test protocols. It is the purpose of this paper to communicate the test conditions, test procedures, and types of analysis used at NASA GRC and MSFC to the space environmental testing community at large, to help with international space-plasma arcing-testing standardization. To be discussed are: 1.Neutral pressures, neutral gases, and vacuum chamber sizes. 2. Electron and ion densities, plasma uniformity, sample sizes, and Debuy lengths. 3. Biasing samples versus self-generated voltages. Floating samples versus grounded. 4. Power supplies and current limits. Isolation of samples from power supplies during arcs. 5. Arc circuits. Capacitance during biased arc-threshold tests. Capacitance during sustained arcing and damage tests. Arc detection. Prevention sustained discharges during testing. 6. Real array or structure samples versus idealized samples. 7. Validity of LEO tests for GEO samples. 8. Extracting arc threshold information from arc rate versus voltage tests. 9. Snapover and current collection at positive sample bias. Glows at positive bias. Kapon (R) pyrolisis. 10. Trigger arc thresholds. Sustained arc thresholds. Paschen discharge during sustained arcing. 11. Testing for Paschen discharge threshold. Testing for dielectric breakdown thresholds. Testing for tether arcing. 12. Testing in very dense plasmas (ie thruster plumes). 13. Arc mitigation strategies. Charging mitigation strategies. Models. 14. Analysis of test results. Finally, the necessity of testing will be emphasized, not to the exclusion of modeling, but as part of a complete strategy for determining when and if arcs will occur, and preventing them from occurring in space.

Ferguson, Dale C.↗
NASA NTRS2005

NASA GRC and MSFC Space-Plasma Arc Testing Procedures

Tests of arcing and current collection in simulated space plasma conditions have been performed at the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) in Cleveland, Ohio, for over 30 years and at the Marshall Space flight Center (MSFC) for almost as long. During this period, proper test conditions for accurate and meaningful space simulation have been worked out, comparisons with actual space performance in spaceflight tests and with real operational satellites have been made, and NASA has achieved our own internal standards for test protocols. It is the purpose of this paper to communicate the test conditions, test procedures, and types of analysis used at NASA GRC and MSFC to the space environmental testing community at large, to help with international space-plasma arcing testing standardization. To be discussed are: 1. Neutral pressures, neutral gases, and vacuum chamber sizes. 2. Electron and ion densities, plasma uniformity, sample sizes, and Debye lengths. 3. Biasing samples versus self-generated voltages. Floating samples versus grounded. 4. Power supplies and current limits. Isolation of samples from power supplies during arcs. Arc circuits. Capacitance during biased arc-threshold tests. Capacitance during sustained arcing and damage tests. Arc detection. Preventing sustained discharges during testing. 5. Real array or structure samples versus idealized samples. 6. Validity of LEO tests for GEO samples. 7. Extracting arc threshold information from arc rate versus voltage tests. 8 . Snapover and current collection at positive sample bias. Glows at positive bias. Kapton pyrolization. 9. Trigger arc thresholds. Sustained arc thresholds. Paschen discharge during sustained arcing. 10. Testing for Paschen discharge thresholds. Testing for dielectric breakdown thresholds. Testing for tether arcing. 11. Testing in very dense plasmas (ie thruster plumes). 12. Arc mitigation strategies. Charging mitigation strategies. Models. 13. Analysis of test results. Finally, the necessity of testing will be emphasized, not to the exclusion of modeling, but as part of a complete strategy for determining when and if arcs will occur, and preventing them from occurring in space.

Ferguson, Dale C.a↗
NASA NTRS2007

NASA GRC and MSFC Space-Plasma Arc Testing Procedures

Tests of arcing and current collection in simulated space plasma conditions have been performed at the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) in Cleveland, Ohio, for over 30 years and at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) in Huntsville, Alabama, for almost as long. During this period, proper test conditions for accurate and meaningful space simulation have been worked out, comparisons with actual space performance in spaceflight tests and with real operational satellites have been made, and NASA has achieved our own internal standards for test protocols. It is the purpose of this paper to communicate the test conditions, test procedures, and types of analysis used at NASA GRC and MSFC to the space environmental testing community at large, to help with international space-plasma arcing-testing standardization. Discussed herein are neutral gas conditions, plasma densities and uniformity, vacuum chamber sizes, sample sizes and Debye lengths, biasing samples versus self-generated voltages, floating samples versus grounded samples, test electrical conditions, arc detection, preventing sustained discharges during testing, real samples versus idealized samples, validity of LEO tests for GEO samples, extracting arc threshold information from arc rate versus voltage tests, snapover, current collection, and glows at positive sample bias, Kapton pyrolysis, thresholds for trigger arcs, sustained arcs, dielectric breakdown and Paschen discharge, tether arcing and testing in very dense plasmas (i.e. thruster plumes), arc mitigation strategies, charging mitigation strategies, models, and analysis of test results. Finally, the necessity of testing will be emphasized, not to the exclusion of modeling, but as part of a complete strategy for determining when and if arcs will occur, and preventing them from occurring in space.

Ferguson, Dale C.↗
NASA NTRS1972

Design, analysis, and tests of a structural prototype Viking aeroshell. I - Aeroshell design and analysis. II - Test procedure and test results.

Two near optimum full-scale Viking aeroshell prototypes (140 deg ring-stiffened conical shells), differing only in base ring size, were designed and tested under uniform pressure to buckling failure. Part I describes the computerized design procedure which iterates between a design program based on approximate equations to determine skin and ring gages and ring spacings, and a sophisticated system of shell of revolution programs for more accurate analysis as a basis for redesign. Part II discusses fabrication techniques, test procedures, and test results. Both buckling and prebuckling data are compared with the theoretical predictions of Part I. Appropriate buckling knockdown factors for this type of construction are identified. Measured strains in skin and rings agreed well with theoretical predictions and the buckling pressure was in close agreement with the design ultimate pressure.

Heard, W. L., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS1982

Development of electrical test procedures for qualification of spacecraft against EID. Volume 2: Review and specification of test procedures

A combined experimental and analytical program to develop system electrical test procedures for the qualification of spacecraft against damage produced by space-electron-induced discharges (EID) occurring on spacecraft dielectric outer surfaces is described. A review and critical evaluation of possible approaches to qualify spacecraft against space electron-induced discharges (EID) is presented. A variety of possible schemes to simulate EID electromagnetic effects produced in spacecraft was studied. These techniques form the principal element of a provisional, recommended set of test procedures for the EID qualification spacecraft. Significant gaps in our knowledge about EID which impact the final specification of an electrical test to qualify spacecraft against EID are also identified.

Wilkenfeld, J. M.↗
NASA NTRS1973

GEOS-C coherent C-band transponder test procedure for spacecraft level tests

Procedures for the performance of two tests (electrical and airlink) for the transponder are outlined. The C-band test console used in performing the above tests is described (circuit diagrams and block diagrams), and equipment specifications are given. Calibration of the test equipment is also discussed.

Selser, A. R.↗
DOE OSTI2025

IROS 2023 Workshop Report: Draft Guidelines on Manufacturing Procedures, Test Methods and Reporting for Soft Robotics

Soft roboticists are facing challenges with reproducibility, which prevents researchers from making holistic comparisons to prior work, impedes full understanding of results, and forces the need to “reinvent the wheel,” delaying fundamental advances. Reproducibility of results is key to advancing science as well as achieving technology transfer from research laboratories to industrial applications. Recently, a discussion-based workshop dedicated to the topic, “Developing Standard Testing and Reporting Guidelines for Soft Robotics,” was held at IROS 2023 in Detroit, MI. The purpose of this document is to record a set of recommendations and voluntary draft guidelines for soft roboticists concerning fabrication/manufacturing, test procedures, and reporting, which were collectively developed at the workshop. Together as a community, we hope to improve the reporting standards of soft robotics and drive the field as a whole toward more rigorous research practices.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
NASA NTRS1978

Test procedures

The test procedures required to evaluate the performance of the Space Lab Bus Interface Unit (SL/BIU) are described. This level of testing involves the design evaluation of signal levels, timing, and signal-to-noise (S/N) performance. The tests are to be comprehensive in order to provide data on the operational characteristics of the SL/BIU. The evluation tests are designed to accomplish the following determinations as a minimum for component level testing of the SL/BIU: (1) the baseline operation parameters for comparison to ICD 2-05301 requirements; (2) the influence of serial data line parameter variation on the operation of SL/BIU; (3) the effects of noise on discrete and serial data lines (S/N ratio); and (4) the effects of cable length variation.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1975

Track/train dynamics test procedure transfer function test

A transfer function vibration test was made on an 80 ton open hopper freight car in an effort to obtain validation data on the car's nonlinear elastic model. Test configuration, handling, test facilities, test operations, and data acquisition/reduction activities necessary to meet the conditions of test requirements are given.

Vigil, R. A.↗
NASA NTRS1975

Interim solar cell testing procedures for terrestrial applications

This report presents an interim draft of procedures for testing solar cells for terrestrial applications that resulted from the terrestrial photovoltaic workshop sessions. A final version of the test procedures manual is planned for the summer of 1976.

Brandhorst, H. W., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS1986

Halogen occultation experiment (HALOE) performance verification test procedure

The Performance Verification Test Procedure is given for the Halogen Occultation Experiment (HALOE) instrument, which is being developed in house at the Langley Research Center for the Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite (UARS). This procedure is used for comprehensive performance testing of the HALOE instrument which occurs before, during, and after flight environmental tests. The radiometric performance tests include noise, drift, linearity, instantaneous field-of-view, cal wheel gas cell characterization, and self thermal emissions. Pointer/tracker performance tests include sun sensor performance, gimbal performance, control system performance, and boresight alignment. In addition, the instrument is tested functionally in simulated orbit sequences and all command operating modes are exercised. The data analysis required for each test is specified and pass/fail criteria are given where applicable. This test will fully demonstrate the HALOE instrument's ability to achieve science mission requirements. The HALOE instrument is a gas correlation radiometer that measures vertical distribution of eight upper atmospheric constituents: O3, HCl, HF, NO, CH4, H2O, NO2, and CO2.

Mauldin, L. E., III↗
NASA NTRS1992

Development of a full-scale transmission testing procedure to evaluate advanced lubricants

Experimental tests were performed on the OH-58A helicopter main rotor transmission in the NASA Lewis 500-hp Helicopter Transmission Test Stand. The testing was part of a joint Navy/NASA/Army lubrication program. The objective of the program was to develop a separate lubricant for gearboxes and demonstrate an improved performance in life and load-carrying capacity. The goal of the experiments was to develop a testing procedure to fail certain transmission components using a MIL-L-23699 base reference oil, then run identical tests with improved lubricants and demonstrate performance. The tests were directed at failing components that the Navy has had problems with due to marginal lubrication. These failures included mast shaft bearing micropitting, sun gear and planet bearing fatigue, and spiral bevel gear scoring. A variety of tests were performed and over 900 hours of total run time accumulated for these tests. Some success was achieved in developing a testing procedure to produce sun gear and planet bearing fatigue failures. Only marginal success was achieved in producing mast shaft bearing micropitting and spiral bevel gear scoring.

Lewicki, David G.↗
NASA NTRS1982

Development of electrical test procedures for qualification of spacecraft against EID. Volume 1: The CAN test and other relevant data

A combined experimental and analytical program to develop system electrical test procedures for the qualification of spacecraft against damage produced by space-electron-induced discharges (EID) occurring on spacecraft dielectric outer surfaces is described. The data on the response of a simple satellite model, called CAN, to electron-induced discharges is presented. The experimental results were compared to predicted behavior and to the response of the CAN to electrical injection techniques simulating blowoff and arc discharges. Also included is a review of significant results from other ground tests and the P78-2 program to form a data base from which is specified those test procedures which optimally simulate the response of spacecraft to EID. The electrical and electron spraying test data were evaluated to provide a first-cut determination of the best methods for performance of electrical excitation qualification tests from the point of view of simulation fidelity.

Wilkenfeld, J. M.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

DO 365 Test Procedure Results and Analysis Discussion

CAL will leverage M&S tools and existing encounter data to evaluate the robustness of the DAA MOPS Test Procedures. Recently, the SC-147 ACAS-Xu team performed an analysis evaluating the Xu implementation against the DAA MOPS test procedures. Several areas of non-compliance were raised, some indicating shortfalls in our DAA test procedures and/or requirements. The ACAS-Xu team is expected to put out a report highlighting these exemptions. This work will build off that ACAS-Xu analysis/report and perform a full characterization of the statistical test procedures and document the findings. Additionally, CAL will provide recommendations for addressing these findings, potentially resulting in changes to test procedures and/or requirements.

ACAS-Xu↗