Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “CORROSION PREVENTION”

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.

173 records · Page 10

Space Shuttle Orbital Maneuvering Subsystem (OMS) Engine Propellant Leakage Ball-Valve Shaft Seals

Evidence of propellant leakage across ball-valve shaft seals has been noted during the disassembly of five flight engines and one test engine at the NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, White Sands Test Facility. Based on data collected during the disassembly of these five engines, the consequences of propellant leakage across the ball-valve shaft seals can be divided into four primary areas of concern: Damage to the ball-valve pinion shafts, damage to sleeved bearings inside the ball-valve and actuator assemblies, degradation of the synthetic rubber o-rings used in the actuator assemblies, and corrosion and degradation to the interior of the actuator assemblies. The exact time at which leakage across the ball-valve shaft seals occurs has not been determined, however, the leakage most likely occurs during engine firings when, depending on the specification used, ball-valve cavity pressures range as high as 453 to 550 psia. This potential pressure range for the ball-valve cavities greatly exceeds the acceptance leakage test pressure of 332 psia. Since redesign and replacement of the ball-valve shaft seals is unlikely, the near term solution to prevent damage that occurs from shaft-seal leakage is to implement a routine overhaul and maintenance program for engines in the fleet. Recommended repair, verification, and possible preventative maintenance measures are discussed in the paper.

Lueders, Kathy↗

Final Report on NASA Portable Laser Coating Removal Systems Field Demonstrations and Testing

Processes currently used throughout the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to remove corrosion and coatings from structures, ground service equipment, small parts and flight components result in waste streams consisting of toxic chemicals, spent media blast materials, and waste water. When chemicals are used in these processes they are typically high in volatile organic compounds (VOC) and are considered hazardous air pollutants (HAP). When blast media is used, the volume of hazardous waste generated is increased significantly. Many of the coatings historically used within NASA contain toxic metals such as hexavalent chromium, and lead. These materials are highly regulated and restrictions on worker exposure continue to increase. Most recently the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) reduced the permissible exposure limit (PEL) for hexavalent chromium (CrVI) from 52 to 5 micrograms per cubic meter of air as an 8-hour time-weighted average. Hexavalent chromium is found in numerous pretreatment and primer coatings used within the Space Shuttle Program. In response to the need to continue to protect assets within the agency and the growing concern over these new regulations, NASA is researching different ways to continue the required maintenance of both facility and flight equipment in a safe, efficient, and environmentally preferable manner. The use of laser energy to prepare surfaces for a variety of processes, such as corrosion and coating removal, weld preparation, and non destructive evaluation (NDE) is a relatively new application of the technology that has been proven to be environmentally preferable and in many cases less labor intensive than currently used removal methods. The novel process eliminates VOCs and blast media and captures the removed coatings with an integrated vacuum system. This means that the only waste generated are the coatings that are removed, resulting in an overall cleaner process. The development of a Portable Laser Coating Removal System (PLCRS) started as the goal of a Joint Group on Pollution Prevention (JG-PP) project, led by the Air Force, where several types of lasers in several configurations were thoroughly evaluated. Following this project, NASA decided to evaluate the best performers on processes and coatings specific to the agency. Laser systems used during this project were all of a similar design, between 40 and 500 Watts, most of which had integrated vacuum systems in order to collect materials removed from substrate surfaces during operation.

Rothgeb, Matthew J↗

Joint Test Protocol for Validation of Alternative Low-Emission Surface Preparation/Depainting Technologies for Structural Steel

Headquarters National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) chartered the Acquisition Pollution Prevention (AP2) Office to coordinate agency activities affecting pollution prevention issues identified during system and component acquisition and sustainment processes. The primary objectives of the AP2 Office are to: (1) Reduce or eliminate the use of hazardous materials (HazMats) or hazardous processes at manufacturing, remanufacturing, and sustainment locations. (2) A void duplication of effort in actions required to reduce or eliminate HazMats through joint center cooperation and technology sharing. This project will identify, evaluate and approve alternative surface preparation technologies for use at NASA and Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) installations. Materials and processes will be evaluated with the goal of selecting those processes that will improve corrosion protection at critical systems, facilitate easier maintenance activity, extend maintenance cycles, eliminate flight hardware contamination and reduce the amount of hazardous waste generated. This Joint Test Protocol (JTP) contains the critical requirements and tests necessary to qualify alternative Low-Emission Surface Preparation/Depainting Technologies for Structural Steel Applications. These tests were derived from engineering, performance, and operational impact (supportability) requirements defined by a consensus of NASA and Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) participants. The Field Test Plan (FTP), entitled Joint Test Protocol for Validation of Alternative Low Emission Surface Preparation/Depainting Technologies for Structural Steel, prepared by ITB, defines the field evaluation and testing requirements for validating alternative surface preparation/depainting technologies and supplements the JTP.

Lewis, Pattie↗

Calcification prevention tablets

Citric acid tablets, which slowly release citric acid when flushed with water, are under development by the Navy for calcification prevention. The citric acid dissolves calcium carbonate deposits and chelates the calcium. For use in urinals, a dispenser is not required because the tablets are non-toxic and safe to handle. The tablets are placed in the bottom of the urinal, and are consumed in several hundred flushes (the release rate can be tailored by adjusting the formulation). All of the ingredients are environmentally biodegradable. Mass production of the tablets on commercial tableting machines was demonstrated. The tablets are inexpensive (about 75 cents apiece). Incidences of clogged pipes and urinals were greatly decreased in long term shipboard tests. The corrosion rate of sewage collection pipe (90/10 Cu/Ni) in citric acid solution in the laboratory is several mils per year at conditions typically found in traps under the urinals. The only shipboard corrosion seen to date is of the yellow brass urinal tail pieces. While this is acceptable, the search for a nontoxic corrosion inhibitor is underway. The shelf life of the tablets is at least one year if stored at 50 percent relative humidity, and longer if stored in sealed plastic buckets.

Lindsay, Geoffrey A.↗

Living Together in Space: The International Space Station Internal Active Thermal Control System Issues and Solutions-Sustaining Engineering Activities at the Marshall Space Flight Center From 1998 to 2005

On board the International Space Station, heat generated by the crew and equipment is removed by the internal active thermal control system to maintain a comfortable working environment and prevent equipment overheating. Test facilities simulating the internal active thermal control system (IATCS) were constructed at the Marshall Space Flight Center as part of the sustaining engineering activities to address concerns related to operational issues, equipment capability, and reliability. A full-scale functional simulator of the Destiny lab module IATCS was constructed and activated prior to launch of Destiny in 2001. This facility simulates the flow and thermal characteristics of the flight system and has a similar control interface. A subscale simulator was built, and activated in 2000, with special attention to materials and proportions of wetted surfaces to address issues related to changes in fluid chemistry, material corrosion, and microbial activity. The flight issues that have arisen and the tests performed using the simulator facilities are discussed in detail. In addition, other test facilities at the MSFC have been used to perform specific tests related to IATCS issues. Future testing is discussed as well as potential modifications to the simulators to enhance their utility.

Wieland, P. O.↗

NASA Tech Briefs, December 2005

Topics covered include: Video Mosaicking for Inspection of Gas Pipelines; Shuttle-Data-Tape XML Translator; Highly Reliable, High-Speed, Unidirectional Serial Data Links; Data-Analysis System for Entry, Descent, and Landing; Hybrid UV Imager Containing Face-Up AlGaN/GaN Photodiodes; Multiple Embedded Processors for Fault-Tolerant Computing; Hybrid Power Management; Magnetometer Based on Optoelectronic Microwave Oscillator; Program Predicts Time Courses of Human/ Computer Interactions; Chimera Grid Tools; Astronomer's Proposal Tool; Conservative Patch Algorithm and Mesh Sequencing for PAB3D; Fitting Nonlinear Curves by Use of Optimization Techniques; Tool for Viewing Faults Under Terrain; Automated Synthesis of Long Communication Delays for Testing; Solving Nonlinear Euler Equations With Arbitrary Accuracy; Self-Organizing-Map Program for Analyzing Multivariate Data; Tool for Sizing Analysis of the Advanced Life Support System; Control Software for a High-Performance Telerobot; Java Radar Analysis Tool; Architecture for Verifiable Software; Tool for Ranking Research Options; Enhanced, Partially Redundant Emergency Notification System; Close-Call Action Log Form; Task Description Language; Improved Small-Particle Powders for Plasma Spraying; Bonding-Compatible Corrosion Inhibitor for Rinsing Metals; Wipes, Coatings, and Patches for Detecting Hydrazines; Rotating Vessels for Growing Protein Crystals; Oscillating-Linear-Drive Vacuum Compressor for CO2; Mechanically Biased, Hinged Pairs of Piezoelectric Benders; Apparatus for Precise Indium-Bump Bonding of Microchips; Radiation Dosimetry via Automated Fluorescence Microscopy; Multistage Magnetic Separator of Cells and Proteins; Elastic-Tether Suits for Artificial Gravity and Exercise; Multichannel Brain-Signal-Amplifying and Digitizing System; Ester-Based Electrolytes for Low-Temperature Li-Ion Cells; Hygrometer for Detecting Water in Partially Enclosed Volumes; Radio-Frequency Plasma Cleaning of a Penning Malmberg Trap; Reduction of Flap Side Edge Noise - the Blowing Flap; and Preventing Accidental Ignition of Upper-Stage Rocket Motors.

Source record↗

Performance Enhancement of the Space Shuttle RSRM Nozzle-to-Case Joint Using a Carbon Rope Barrier

A carbon rope "thermal barrier" is being considered as a component to enhance performance of the Reusable Solid Rocket Motor (RSRM) nozzle-to-case joint. Fundamental performance characteristics of the rope have been considered in this paper. In particular, resistance to erosion, ability to filter particulate matter, thermal capacitance, and flow resistance have been considered. Testing results have shown the rope to be resistant to the corrosive internal environment of the RSRM. The rope has also been shown to be an effective "slag barrier." A desirable feature of the rope would be the ability to act as a heat sink. However, analyses have indicated that the thermal capacitance of the rope is not large enough to reduce the temperature of an impinging gas stream below the ablation temperature of the 0-ring for significant time periods, The real value of the rope is its ability to act as a flow diffuser. Flow resistance test, were performed on the rope In the course of testing the rope between parallel plates, an undesirable "blow-by" phenomenon was observed when the compressive stress in the rope was smaller than the upstream gas pressure. It was found, however, that in the converging passage of the actual design, the rope would consistently "Self-seat" and thereby prevent blow-by, even in the absence of any precompression. Flow resistance values have been quantified for use in future analyses. The work presented here provides an initial thermal-fluid assessment of the rope for this application, and lays the groundwork for future development.

Ewing, M. E.↗

Metallurgical Evaluations of Depainting Processes on Aluminum Substrate

In December 1993, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Emission Standards Division and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA's) Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) signed an Interagency Agreement (IA) initiating a task force for the technical assessment of alternative technologies for aerospace depainting operations. The United States Air Force (USAF) joined the task force in 1994. The mandates of the task force were: (1) To identify available alternative depainting systems that do not rely on methylene chloride or other ozone-depleting, chlorinated, and volatile organic carbon solvents. (2) To determine the viability, applicability, and pollution prevention potential of each identified alternative. (3) To address issues of safety, environmental impact, reliability, and maintainability. Through a Technical Implementation Committee (TIC), the task force selected and evaluated eight alternative paint stripping technologies: chemical stripping, carbon dioxide (CO2) blasting, xenon flashlamp and CO2 coatings removal (FLASHJET(R)), CO2 laser stripping, plastic media blasting (PMB), sodium bicarbonate wet stripping, high-pressure water blasting (WaterJet), and wheat starch abrasive blasting (Enviro-Strip(R)). (The CO2 blasting study was discontinued after the first depainting sequence.) This final report presents the results of the Joint EPA/NASA/USAF Interagency Depainting Study. Significant topics include: (1) Final depainting sequence data for the chemical stripping, PMB, sodium bicarbonate wet stripping, and WaterJet processes. (2) Strip rates for all eight technologies. (3) Sequential comparisons of surface roughness measurements for the seven viable depainting technologies. (4) Chronological reviews of and lessons learned in the conduct of all eight technologies. (5) An analysis of the surface roughness trends for each of the seven technologies. (6) Metallurgic evaluations of panels Summaries of corrosion and hydrogen embrittlement evaluations of chemical stripping panels, detailed descriptions of which appear in previous reports. Because the requirements for alternative systems are diverse, as are initial setup, training, and on-going operational considerations, this study does not recommend a particular product or process. Users of this study will draw their own conclusions from the data presented herein.

McGill, Preston↗

Fire-Retardant Polymeric Additives

Polyhydroxyamide (PHA) and polymethoxyamide (PMeOA) are fire-retardant (FR) thermoplastic polymers and have been found to be useful as an additive for imparting fire retardant properties to other compatible, thermoplastic polymers (including some elastomers). Examples of compatible flammable polymers include nylons, polyesters, and acrylics. Unlike most prior additives, PHA and PMeOA do not appreciably degrade the mechanical properties of the matrix polymer; indeed, in some cases, mechanical properties are enhanced. Also, unlike some prior additives, PHA and PMeOA do not decompose into large amounts of corrosive or toxic compounds during combustion and can be processed at elevated temperatures. PMeOA derivative formulations were synthesized and used as an FR additive in the fabrication of polyamide (PA) and polystyrene (PS) composites with notable reduction (>30 percent for PS) in peak heat release rates compared to the neat polymer as measured by a Cone Calorimeter (ASTM E1354). Synergistic effects were noted with nanosilica composites. These nanosilica composites had more than 50-percent reduction in peak heat release rates. In a typical application, a flammable thermoplastic, thermoplastic blend, or elastomer that one seeks to render flame-retardant is first dry-mixed with PHA or PMeOA or derivative thereof. The proportion of PHA or PMeOA or derivative in the mixture is typically chosen to lie between 1 and 20 weight percent. The dry blend can then be melt-extruded. The extruded polymer blend can further be extruded and/or molded into fibers, pipes, or any other of a variety of objects that may be required to be fire-retardant. The physical and chemical mechanisms which impart flame retardancy of the additive include inhibiting free-radical oxidation in the vapor phase, preventing vaporization of fuel (the polymer), and cooling through the formation of chemical bonds in either the vapor or the condensed phase. Under thermal stress, the cyclic hydroxyl/ methoxy component forms polybenzoxazole (PBO) in a reaction that absorbs heat from its surroundings. PBO under thermal stress cross-links, forming a protective char layer, which thermally insulates the polymer. Thus, the formation of the char layer further assists to extinguish the fire by preventing vaporization of the polymeric fuel.

Williams, Martha K.↗

Joint Test Report For Validation of Alternatives to Aliphatic Isocyanate Polyurethanes

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) have similar missions and therefore similar facilities and structures in similar environments. The standard practice for protecting metallic substrates in atmospheric environments is the application of an applied coating system. The most common topcoats used in coating systems are polyurethanes that contain isocyanates. Isocyanates are classified as potential human carcinogens and are known to cause cancer in animals. The primary objective of this effort was to demonstrate and validate alternatives to aliphatic isocyanate polyurethanes resulting in one or more isocyanate-free coatings qualified for use at AFSPC and NASA installations participating in this project. This joint Test Report (JTR) documents the results of the laboratory and field testing as well as any test modifications made during the execution of the testing. The technical stakeholders agreed upon test procedure modifications documented in this document. This JTR is made available as a reference for future pollution prevention endeavors by other NASA centers, the Department of Defense and commercial users to minimize duplication of effort. All coating system candidates were tested using approved NASA and AFSPC standard coating systems as experimental controls. This study looked at eight alternative coating systems and two control coating systems and was divided into Phase I Screening Tests, Phase II Tests, and Field Testing. The Phase I Screening Tests were preliminary tests performed on all the selected candidate coating systems. Candidate coating systems that did not meet the acceptance criteria of the screening tests were eliminated from further testing. Phase I Screening Tests included: Ease of Application, Surface Appearance, Dry-To-Touch (Sanding), Accelerated Storage Stability, Pot Life (Viscosity), Cure Time (Solvent Rubs), Cleanability, Knife Test, Tensile (pull-off) Adhesion, and X-Cut Adhesion by Wet Tape After a review of the Phase I test results, four of the alternative coating systems showed substandard performance in relation to the Control Systems and were eliminated from the Phase II testing. Due to the interest of stakeholders and time constraints, however, all eight alternatives were subjected to the following Phase II tests, along with field testing at Stennis Space Center (SSC), Mississippi: Hypergol Compatibility, Liquid Oxygen Compatibility, 18-Month Marine Exposure (Gloss Retention, Color Retention, Blistering, Visual Corrosion, Creepage from Scribe, Heat Adhesion), and Field Exposure (6- and 12-month Evaluation for Coating Condition, Color Retention, Gloss Retention). The remaining four alternative coating systems determined to be the best viable alternatives were carried on to Phase II testing that included: Removability, Repairability, Abrasion Resistance, Gravelometer, Fungus Resistance, Accelerated Weathering, Mandrel Bend Flexibility, and Cyclic Corrosion Resistance. Of the systems that continued to Phase II, three (3) alternative coating systems meet the performance requirements as identified by stakeholders. Two (2) other systems, that were not included in Phase II testing, performed well enough on the 18-Month Marine Exposure, the primary requirement for NASA technical standard NASA-STD-5008, Protective Coating of Carbon Steel, Stainless Steel, and Aluminum on Launch Structures, Facilities, and Ground Support Equipment, that they were also considered to be successful candidates. In total, five (5) alternative coating systems were approved for inclusion in the NASA-STD- 5008 Qualified Products List (QPL). The standard is intended to provide a common framework for consistent practices across NASA and is often used by other entities. The standard's QPL does not connote endorsement of the products by NASA, but lists those products that have been tested and meet the requirements as specified.

Lewis, Pattie↗

Analysis of Launch Vehicle Liftoff Debris: Historical Perspective from Space Shuttle and Application to Artemis I

Human exploration-class launch vehicles are inherently prone to debris due to the extreme environments generated during pre-launch operations, liftoff, and flight. The use of cryogenic propellants often requires thermal protection system (TPS) coatings, typically foam, to maintain the propellant conditions in the tank and prevent an accumulation ice on the external surface of the vehicle. Some ice growth is to be expected at umbilical interfaces, vents, flanges, or brackets where it is difficult to apply TPS. This ice may come loose at any time due to wind on the launch pad, structural vibration and acoustics after rocket ignition, or aerodynamic forces during flight. This phenomena is especially apparent on vehicles with no TPS, such as the Saturn V rockets used in the Apollo Program, see Figure 1. During propellant tanking, the thermal contraction of the underlying substrate may generate cracks in the TPS (Figure 1). Chunks of TPS can release due to the expansion of ingested gas from cryopumping or from aerodynamic forces if the crack creates an offset surface. Most foams will also have a certain amount of “popcorning” where small pieces of foam will pop off during flight because of the differential between the static surface pressure and the pressure of the gas trapped in the foam cell structure. There are a number of other coating or closeout materials that may be shed from the vehicle and become debris. During pre-launch operations and liftoff, the vehicle may also be exposed to debris originating from the launch pad or ground support equipment. This debris is separate from foreign object debris, or FOD, which is not intended to be present and is strictly controlled through operations and maintenance procedures. In this case, debris is generated from hardware and materials that are necessary for launch and are subject to the intense vibration, acoustics, and direct plume impingement of the launch environment. Examples include ice from umbilicals, tape and tie wraps that protect cables, and rust or corrosion from the launch platform. While NASA has historically been aware of debris as a potential issue that could cause a failure resulting in loss of mission, loss of vehicle, or loss of crew, the likelihood and severity of that risk was not always well understood or given sufficient weight in program and flight decisions. After the Space Shuttle Columbia accident (STS-107), the investigation found that foam TPS debris shed from the external tank was the proximate cause of the damage to the orbiter wing. Six previous observations of debris released from the foam ramp that covered the bipod connecting the forward end of the orbiter to the external tank resulted in minor changes or were determined to be accepted flight risks. Two occurrences of bipod ramp foam loss were not identified until the STS-107 investigation. Despite the damage inflicted by these debris strikes, the Shuttle Program Requirements Control Board deemed the vehicle safe to fly. During the Return to Flight effort following the Columbia disaster, NASA Engineering developed a process for the assessment of debris transport, impact, and damage tolerance to support independent assessments of risk by NASA Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA). Under this system, each element (vehicle or ground system) defines a catalog of all expected debris based on launch history, component testing, or analysis. Debris transport analysis (DTA) is conducted using the debris catalog characteristics and potential flow transport mechanisms (e.g., vehicle aerodynamics, gravity, wind, plume-driven). The predicted debris impact locations and velocities are provided to the hardware owners, who use available test data and analysis to determine whether each component can withstand the impacts. In cases where the element hardware may be severely damaged or fail, the options are to mitigate the debris source through some change in design or operation, or to work with S&MA to try to characterize the probability of the impact and damage for program risk acceptance. Because of the differences in debris characteristics and transport, the DTA has been divided between the Liftoff and Ascent regimes. The development and application of Liftoff DTA methodology from the Shuttle Program to the current Artemis Program is the subject of this paper. Liftoff DTA covers the time from the start of pre-launch operations at the launch pad, up until the vehicle clears the launch tower and there is no longer any interaction with ground systems. Debris transport during this period is broadly classified as either gravity, wind, and plume-entrained (GWPE) or plume driven (PD). GWPE debris is generally lower speed, travelling in a forward-to-aft direction. PD transport includes flow features from the rocket ignition transient, as well as plume impingement and recirculation that occur as the vehicle lifts off the launch platform. In these cases, the debris typically moves in an aft-to-forward direction at higher speeds. The applicable transport mechanisms must be considered for each piece of debris depending on the material, and release location and time. For example, rust or metallic debris from the tower could fall (GWPE) and impact the vehicle before landing on the launch platform deck where it could be also be transported by plume impingement (PD). However, falling ice (GWPE) from an umbilical is unlikely to survive impact with the vehicle or launch platform and be available for PD transport. Modeling of debris transport is accomplished using a set of DTA tools which simulate debris trajectories subject to a reference frame acceleration (i.e., gravity) and aerodynamic drag. Where the trajectory encounters a solid surface, the debris is allowed to rebound with a specified coefficient of restitution. The drag is calculated by interpolating the fluid state at each point in the debris trajectory from high-fidelity computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations of the launch vehicle and pad. The CFD data may either be static (steady state or time averaged), typically for GWPE transport, or dynamic (time-accurate) for PD flow features like the ignition transient. Examples of the CFD flow field solutions for the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket and launch pad are shown in Figure 2. Typical SLS debris trajectory predictions from DTA are illustrated in Figure 3. The final version of this paper will include a more detailed examination of the Liftoff DTA process developed during the Shuttle Program, and how it has been augmented and applied to the SLS rocket under the Artemis Program. Comparisons with debris observations from the Artemis I launch will demonstrate validation of the tools and methodology.

Debris↗