NASA NTRS · 20200003819
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Beth Rieken, Scott Berry. Aeroheating Measurements of BOLT Aerodynamic Fairings and Transition Module. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20200003819
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
The Orion Aerosciences program at NASA Langley has played a central role in advancing the aerodynamic and aeroheating prediction capabilities required for the Orion crew vehicle’s return from deep space. This presentation provides a technical overview of aerosciences contributions spanning Exploration Flight Test-1 (EFT-1), Artemis I, and the ongoing post-flight analysis of Artemis II. EFT-1 provided the first high-energy entry dataset for Orion, enabling critical validation of aerodynamic force and moment predictions, static and dynamic stability characteristics, and aeroheating environments at relevant flight Mach and Reynolds numbers. Flight-derived pressure data were used to refine the Flush Air Data System (FADS) methodology for atmospheric density reconstruction and to improve Best Estimated Trajectory (BET) solutions. The EFT-1 data also offered key insights into heat shield performance, including char layer recession, in-depth thermal response, and material retention behavior under flight conditions, informing updates to both thermal response models and uncertainty quantification practices. Building on EFT-1, Artemis I extended the database to true lunar-return conditions. Observations of heat shield performance, including localized char loss, bondline response, and recession variability, provided an unprecedented opportunity to reassess Thermal Protection System (TPS) and aeroheating modeling assumptions. Aerodynamic reconstruction efforts incorporated improved FADS calibration, enhanced atmospheric modeling, and refined force and moment databases to reduce trajectory and load uncertainties. Aeroheating comparisons between pre-flight predictions and flight data enabled targeted model updates, particularly in transitional flow environments and wake heating regions. For Artemis II, these lessons were systematically incorporated into the pre-flight prediction process. Updates included refined aerodynamic databases anchored to flight-validated corrections, improved density estimation and BET methodologies using enhanced database interpolation algorithm and FADS modeling, and revised aeroheating design environments informed by Artemis I material response observations. By the time of the workshop, Artemis II post-flight analysis will be underway, and preliminary findings will be presented where available, including early comparisons of aerodynamic reconstruction, atmospheric density estimation, and thermal protection system performance relative to updated predictions. Collectively, this body of work is a testament to the dedicated and multidisciplinary team whose sustained efforts have contributed to the program’s success and to the progressive maturation of Orion aerosciences modeling through numerical modeling, ground and flight data assimilation. The integrated advancement of aerodynamics, trajectory reconstruction, FADS-based density estimation, and aeroheating analysis has reduced predictive uncertainty and strengthened confidence for future crewed lunar and deep-space missions.
The bolt tensile and joint separation loads are directly influenced by the locations at which the external loads enter the clamped members of a preloaded bolted joint (PBJ) and the associated load-paths through the joint. This physical load introduction mechanism affecting the bolt tensile loading is typically represented in the bolt tensile load equation, in part, by a load introduction factor (LIF), which was shown by H.M. Lee of Marshall Spaceflight Center to be a natural product of the bolt tensile load equation using a linear spring stiffness model. This LIF, being a function of load-path stiffness, has subsequently been denoted as the stiffness-based LIF (SBLIF), providing a framework to calculate the LIF using whatever load-path stiffness approximations are appropriate. Expanding upon the work of Lee, it is shown that the SBLIF and the joint stiffness factor are functions of the stiffnesses of the same load-paths and regions within a PBJ, and thus they should not be treated as independent variables. Mathematical expressions for the SBLIF are presented. Comparisons are shown between the analytically calculated SBLIF, the analytically calculated geometric LIF (GLIF), which is a simple clamped-member thickness ratio, the experimentally derived LIF, and the LIF determined by finite element analysis (FEA). Using experiment and FEA as a benchmark, the SBLIF, using traditional load-path stiffness approximations, enables a more accurate prediction of bolt tensile loading than the GLIF, although it can be unconservative near joint separation. The GLIF generally attributes more of the externally applied tensile load to the bolt than does the SBLIF, potentially resulting in heavier and/or more costly bolted joints. Mathematical relationships between the SBLIF and the GLIF are developed. Supplemental material is provided in the appendixes where the historical practice of using the joint compressive stiffness in place of the joint tensile stiffness is evaluated. The appendixes include step-by-step examples demonstrating the calculation of the SBLIF using traditional stiffness approximations and conclude with the development of the joint diagram in terms of the SBLIF, culminating into formulas for the key features of a joint diagram, which is useful for programming.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.