Engineering topics

Yuchnovicz, Daniel E.

Publications and source records attributed to Yuchnovicz, Daniel E..

8 records

NASA NTRS2018

Space System Verification Approach Based on MEAL and Mission Risk Posture

There is no "one size fits all" solution for verifying space avionics systems to ensure safety and mission success. This paper presents a verification approach based on MEAL and risk posture for space systems. MEAL refers to Mission, mission Environment, Application, and Lifetime of the application. In addition to the description of the verification approach, the paper also provides the awareness of the different levels of risks associated with verification tests and inspections when performed at part-, board- and box-level, and discusses the applications of the approach for flight heritage verification, commercial off the shelf (COTS) verification and radiation-effects verification.

Mission Environment Application and Lifetime (MEAL↗

NASA NTRS2018

Space System Verification Approach Based on MEAL and Mission Risk Posture

Mission Environment Application and Lifetime (MEAL↗

NASA NTRS2018

Guidelines for Verification Strategies to Minimize RISK Based on Mission Environment, -Application and -Lifetime (MEAL)

There is a trend of compromising verification testing to address the cost and schedule constraints, which poses a high-risk posture for programs/projects. Current and emerging aerospace scientific and/or human exploration programs continue to pose new technological challenges. These technological challenges combined with finite budgets and truncated schedules are forcing designers, scientists, engineers, and managers to push technologies to their physical limits. In addition, budget and schedule pressures challenge how those technologies/missions are verified. A clear understanding of the different verification processes is needed to ensure the proper verification of the technology within the mission (i.e., capabilities, advantages, and limitations). The goal of verification is to prove through test, analysis, inspection, and/or demonstration that a product provides its required function while meeting the performance requirements. It is important that verification yield understanding of representative performance under worst-case conditions so that margins to failure can be evaluated for proposed applications. The capabilities, advantages, and limitations of the testing and inspection performed at each level are different, and the risk incurred by omitting a verification step depends on the level of integration as well as Mission, Environment, Application and Lifetime (MEAL). This paper focuses on verification processes. The goal of the verification process is to ensure the given avionics technology could be safely implemented on the given MEAL consistent with the program/project risk posture.

Gonzalez, Oscar↗

NASA NTRS2011

Testing Strategies and Methodologies for the Max Launch Abort System

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) was tasked to develop an alternate, tower-less launch abort system (LAS) as risk mitigation for the Orion Project. The successful pad abort flight demonstration test in July 2009 of the "Max" launch abort system (MLAS) provided data critical to the design of future LASs, while demonstrating the Agency s ability to rapidly design, build and fly full-scale hardware at minimal cost in a "virtual" work environment. Limited funding and an aggressive schedule presented a challenge for testing of the complex MLAS system. The successful pad abort flight demonstration test was attributed to the project s systems engineering and integration process, which included: a concise definition of, and an adherence to, flight test objectives; a solid operational concept; well defined performance requirements, and a test program tailored to reducing the highest flight test risks. The testing ranged from wind tunnel validation of computational fluid dynamic simulations to component ground tests of the highest risk subsystems. This paper provides an overview of the testing/risk management approach and methodologies used to understand and reduce the areas of highest risk - resulting in a successful flight demonstration test.

Schaible, Dawn M.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Modeling, Analysis and Simulation Approaches Used in Development of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Max Launch Abort System

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Engineering and Safety Center was chartered to develop an alternate launch abort system (LAS) as risk mitigation for the Orion Project. Its successful flight test provided data for the design of future LAS vehicles. Design of the flight test vehicle (FTV) and pad abort trajectory relied heavily on modeling and simulation including computational fluid dynamics for vehicle aero modeling, 6-degree-of-freedom kinematics models for flight trajectory modeling, and 3-degree-of-freedom kinematics models for parachute force modeling. This paper highlights the simulation techniques and the interaction between the aerodynamics, flight mechanics, and aerodynamic decelerator disciplines during development of the Max Launch Abort System FTV.

Yuchnovicz, Daniel E.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Constellation Program (CxP) Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) Project Integrated Landing System

Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) Chief Engineer requested a risk comparison of the Integrated Landing System design developed by NASA and the design developed by Contractor- referred to as the LM 604 baseline. Based on the results of this risk comparison, the CEV Chief engineer requested that the NESC evaluate identified risks and develop strategies for their reduction or mitigation. The assessment progressed in two phases. A brief Phase I analysis was performed by the Water versus Land-Landing Team to compare the CEV Integrated Landing System proposed by the Contractor against the NASA TS-LRS001 baseline with respect to risk. A phase II effort examined the areas of critical importance to the overall landing risk, evaluating risk to the crew and to the CEV Crew Module (CM) during a nominal land-landing. The findings of the assessment are contained in this report.

Baker, John D.↗

NASA NTRS2009

A Review of the MLAS Parachute Systems

The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) is developing the Max Launch Abort System (MLAS) as a risk-mitigation design should problems arise with the baseline Orion spacecraft launch abort design. The Max in MLAS is dedicated to Max Faget, the renowned NASA spacecraft designer. The MLAS flight test vehicle consists of boost skirt, coast skirt and the MLAS fairing which houses a full scale boilerplate Orion Crew Module (CM). The objective of the flight test is to prove that the CM can be released from the MLAS fairing during pad abort conditions without detrimental recontact between the CM and fairing, achieving performance similar to the Orion launch abort system. The boost and coast skirts provide the necessary thrust and stability to achieve the flight test conditions and are released prior to the test -- much like the Little Joe booster was used in the Apollo Launch Escape System tests. To achieve the test objective, two parachutes are deployed from the fairing to reorient the CM/fairing to a heatshield first orientation. The parachutes then provide the force necessary to reduce the total angle of attack and body angular rates required for safe release of the CM from the fairing. A secondary test objective after CM release from the fairing is to investigate the removal of the CM forward bay cover (FBC) with CM drogue parachutes for the purpose of attempting to synchronously deploying a set of CM main parachutes. Although multiple parachute deployments are used in the MLAS flight test vehicle to complete its objective, there are only two parachute types employed in the flight test. Five of the nine parachutes used for MLAS are 27.6 ft D(sub 0) ribbon parachutes, and the remaining four are standard G-12 cargo parachutes. This paper presents an overview of the 27.6 ft D(sub 0) ribbon parachute system employed on the MLAS flight test vehicle for coast skirt separation, fairing reorientation, and as drogue parachutes for the CM after separation from the fairing. Discussion will include: the process used to select this design, previously proven as a spin/stall recovery parachute; descriptions of all components of the parachute system; the minor modifications necessary to adapt the parachute to the MLAS program; the techniques used to analyze the parachute for the multiple roles it performs; a discussion of the rigging techniques used to interface the parachute system to the vehicle; and a brief description of how the evolution of the program affected parachute usage and analysis. An overview of the Objective system, rationale for the MLAS approach and the future of the program will also be presented. We hope to have flight test results to report at the time of the Conference Presentation.

Taylor, Anthony P.↗

NASA NTRS2001

Use of a Data-Linked Weather Information Display and Effects on Pilot Navigation Decision Making in a Piloted Simulation Study

This study provides recommendations to the FAA and to prospective manufacturers based on an exploration of the effects of data link weather displays upon pilot decision performance. An experiment was conducted with twenty-four current instrument rated pilots who were divided into two equal groups and presented with a challenging but realistic flight scenario involving weather containing significant embedded convective activity. All flights were flown in a full-mission simulation facility within instrument meteorological conditions. The inflight weather display depicted NexRad images, graphical METARs and textual METARs. The objective was to investigate the potential for misuse of a weather display, and incorporate recommendations for the design and use of these displays. The primary conclusion of the study found that the inflight weather display did not improve weather avoidance decision making. Some of the reasons to support this finding include: the pilot's inability to easily perceive their proximity to the storms, increased workload and difficulty in deciphering METAR textual data. The compelling nature of a graphical weather display caused many pilots to reduce their reliance on corroborating weather information from other sources. Minor changes to the weather display could improve the ability of a pilot to make better decisions on hazard avoidance.

Yuchnovicz, Daniel E.↗