Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “High-Level Synthesis”

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.

586 records · Page 12
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Battery Evaluation Profiles for X-57 and Future Urban Electric Aircraft

Battery energy density is one of the most critical design parameters for sizing all-electric aircraft, however it’s easily overestimated. Establishing the effective, usable energy density is confused by varying degrees of margin needed to account for structural and thermal management between different cell chemistry and pack designs. Therefore, a better methodology is needed to fairly compare emerging battery technologies for electric aircraft. Currently, there is a loss of critical information when vehicle trade studies are performed using “nominal” published cell-level performance metrics. Aircraft power demands rarely match these nominal power profiles, and aircraft designers lack the ability to accurately simulate the battery performance and temperature off-nominally unless the battery chemistry is well established. Conversely, battery suppliers have no generalized reference cases to publish more realistic performance metrics. This can lead to poor assumptions, such as aircraft studies assuming a fixed discharge efficiency of a battery, when in reality the usable energy in a pack is dependent on the power and thermal profile. Information needed to properly assess weight penalties for thermal management is also typically poorly characterized when assessing candidate batteries. This paper serves to better inform battery development, and similarly, provide aircraft designers with more realistic assumptions for applying knockdown margins in their designs. Detailed power and thermal performance estimates are provided, which provide a starting point for sizing power and thermal budgets using experimentally derived battery models. Results show that the X-57 battery-to-shaft efficiency is 77.3% for a particular optimized mission. Considering a 25% reserve on the battery capacity, this means that only roughly half of the original 55.3kWh ‘nominal’ pack energy can be converted to useful work during a mission. Further estimates on a clean-sheet VTOL optimization show an average 82.7% battery-to-shaft efficiency, using 98% peak efficiency inverters and 97.4% peak efficiency motors. Although higher battery efficiencies are possible, the resulting weight penalty negates improvement in vehicle performance. These trade-offs and resulting power profiles are provided as a starting point to better assess future battery designs.

Battery↗
NASA NTRS2019

Safe, High Power/Voltage Battery Module Design Challenges

NASA seeks to demonstrate a path for achieving safe, high power, and high performing Li-ion battery designs for the purpose of establishing design guidelines for our aeronautic and spacecraft applications. Safe means passively resistant to thermal runaway propagation of any single cell catastrophic thermal runaway. High power means capable of 3C continuous discharge without overheating. High performing means achieving > 160 Wh/kg, 200 Wh/L. The biggest challenge has been balancing a high flux light weight path for cell heat dissipation during the high rate discharge that minimizes thermal gradients between cells and also protects adjacent cells from the heat load of thermal runaway cell. Our solution includes an oscillating heat pipe spine that contacts every 18650 cell in the pack and careful cell design selection to maximize the range of initial temperatures conditions where the battery can safely complete the 3C discharge.

Thermal runaway↗
NASA NTRS2019

Safe, High Power / Voltage Battery Design Challenges

NASA seeks safe, high performing battery module designs that can deliver 3C discharge rates continuously, achieve 160 Wh/kg, and is passively propagation resistant to a single cell thermal runaway event. One solution is presented that uses a patented oscillating heat pipe technology for thermal management. Combined with light weight packaging and a new commercially available gas permeable vent port, all 5 preliminary safety tests results performed to date are showing ample margins.

High power↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Performance of a Regenerative Fuel Cell System for the Lunar Surface

Regenerative fuel cells (RFCs) are an attractive energy storage solution for lunar missions as a technology capable of providing a higher specific energy (i.e., W∙h/kg) than state-of-the-art packaged Li-ion battery systems. An RFC consists of the (1 & 2) electrochemical stacks (chemical to electrical energy conversion to supply electricity to an external load, i.e. the fuel cell reaction, and electrical to chemical energy conversion of supplied electrical power to dissociate water into hydrogen and oxygen gases, i.e. water electrolysis), (3) fluidic conditioning, (4) reactant storage, (5) avionics, (6) power management and distribution (PMAD), and (7) thermal management. NASA’s Glenn Research Center has designed, assembled, and tested a breadboard RFC sys-tem capable of operating autonomously for multiple simulated lunar day/night cycles in a laboratory environment. The system is comprised of a non-flow through proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell stack and a liquid-anode feed PEM electrolyzer (EZ) stack designed to electrochemically compress the reactants at balanced pressures up to 12.4 MPa (1800 psia). The fluidic conditioning, avionics, PMAD, and thermal management sub-systems are largely comprised of commercial-off-the-shelf components for this system-level development effort. The hardware is controlled by a CubeSat space processor running an operational program based on core flight architecture that can control the RFC hardware autonomously through a state machine with fault monitoring. The testing results highlighted here were completed with the system in an open-loop configuration such that reactants generated through water electrolysis were vented while gas cylinders supplied fuel cell operation. The breadboard operated autonomously, but there were five unplanned transitions to a safe state that required a manual restart after reviewing the data, determining a root cause, and implementing a solution. Four of the transitions were caused by the thermal management subsystem and the fifth was caused by a water management control issue in the EZ sub-system. The RFC system operated for over 550 hours with the final cycle being slightly abbreviated due to reasons unrelated to system performance.

Kerrigan Cain↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Performance of a Regenerative Fuel Cell System for the Lunar Surface

Regenerative fuel cells (RFCs) are an attractive energy storage solution for lunar missions as a technology capable of providing a higher specific energy (i.e., W∙h/kg) than state-of-the-art packaged Li-ion battery systems. An RFC consists of the (1 & 2) electrochemical stacks (chemical to electrical energy conversion to supply electricity to an external load, i.e. the fuel cell reaction, and electrical to chemical energy conversion of supplied electrical power to dissociate water into hydrogen and oxygen gases, i.e. water electrolysis), (3) fluidic conditioning, (4) reactant storage, (5) avionics, (6) power management and distribution (PMAD), and (7) thermal management. NASA’s Glenn Research Center has designed, assembled, and tested a breadboard RFC sys-tem capable of operating autonomously for multiple simulated lunar day/night cycles in a laboratory environment. The system is comprised of a non-flow through proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell stack and a liquid-anode feed PEM electrolyzer (EZ) stack designed to electrochemically compress the reactants at balanced pressures up to 12.4 MPa (1800 psia). The fluidic conditioning, avionics, PMAD, and thermal management sub-systems are largely comprised of commercial-off-the-shelf components for this system-level development effort. The hardware is controlled by a CubeSat space processor running an operational program based on core flight architecture that can control the RFC hardware autonomously through a state machine with fault monitoring. The testing results highlighted here were completed with the system in an open-loop configuration such that reactants generated through water electrolysis were vented while gas cylinders supplied fuel cell operation. The breadboard operated autonomously, but there were five unplanned transitions to a safe state that required a manual restart after reviewing the data, determining a root cause, and implementing a solution. Four of the transitions were caused by the thermal management subsystem and the fifth was caused by a water management control issue in the EZ sub-system. The RFC system operated for over 550 hours with the final cycle being slightly abbreviated due to reasons unrelated to system performance.

Kerrigan Cain↗