Search NASASearch

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Interference mitigation”

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.

203 records · Page 12

Waterhammer Transient Simulation and Model Anchoring for the Robotic Lunar Lander Propulsion System

Waterhammer transients have the potential to adversely impact propulsion system design if not properly addressed. Waterhammer can potentially lead to system plumbing, and component damage. Multi-thruster propulsion systems also develop constructive/destructive wave interference which becomes difficult to predict without detailed models. Therefore, it is important to sufficiently characterize propulsion system waterhammer in order to develop a robust design with minimal impact to other systems. A risk reduction activity was performed at Marshall Space Flight Center to develop a tool for estimating waterhammer through the use of anchored simulation for the Robotic Lunar Lander (RLL) propulsion system design. Testing was performed to simulate waterhammer surges due to rapid valve closure and consisted of twenty-two series of waterhammer tests, resulting in more than 300 valve actuations. These tests were performed using different valve actuation schemes and three system pressures. Data from the valve characterization tests were used to anchor the models that employed MSCSoftware.EASY5 v.2010 to model transient fluid phenomena by using transient forms of mass and energy conservation. The anchoring process was performed by comparing initial model results to experimental data and then iterating the model input to match the simulation results with the experimental data. The models provide good correlation with experimental results, supporting the use of EASY5 as a tool to model fluid transients and provide a baseline for future RLL system modeling. This paper addresses tasks performed during the waterhammer risk reduction activity for the RLL propulsion system. The problem of waterhammer simulation anchoring as applied to the RLL system is discussed with results from the corresponding experimental valve tests. Important factors for waterhammer mitigation are discussed along with potential design impacts to the RLL propulsion system.

Stein, William B.

Mitigation of Finite Bandwidth Effects in Time-Division-Multiplexed SQUID Readout of TES Arrays

Time division multiplexing (TDM) is being developed as the readout technology of the X-ray integral field unit (X-IFU), a 3,168-pixel X-ray transition-edge sensor (TES) imaging spectrometer that is part of the European Space Agency's Athena satellite mission. Recent improvements in the low X-ray event count rate performance of TDM have been driven by increases in multiplexer bandwidth and the mitigation of settling transients. These methods and design changes have improved the 32-row multiplexed resolution of a NASA LPA 2.5a array from an initial (2.73 ± 0.03) eV to (1.97 ± 0.01) eV resolution at 5.9 keV. We discuss these recent advances in TDM readout, which have been implemented in an 8-column × 32-row spectrometer that will be deployed at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory electron beam ion trap (EBIT) facility, and present a model that will inform the design of future systems.

Transition-edge sensors

Strategy Developed for Selecting Optimal Sensors for Monitoring Engine Health

Sensor indications during rocket engine operation are the primary means of assessing engine performance and health. Effective selection and location of sensors in the operating engine environment enables accurate real-time condition monitoring and rapid engine controller response to mitigate critical fault conditions. These capabilities are crucial to ensure crew safety and mission success. Effective sensor selection also facilitates postflight condition assessment, which contributes to efficient engine maintenance and reduced operating costs. Under the Next Generation Launch Technology program, the NASA Glenn Research Center, in partnership with Rocketdyne Propulsion and Power, has developed a model-based procedure for systematically selecting an optimal sensor suite for assessing rocket engine system health. This optimization process is termed the systematic sensor selection strategy. Engine health management (EHM) systems generally employ multiple diagnostic procedures including data validation, anomaly detection, fault-isolation, and information fusion. The effectiveness of each diagnostic component is affected by the quality, availability, and compatibility of sensor data. Therefore systematic sensor selection is an enabling technology for EHM. Information in three categories is required by the systematic sensor selection strategy. The first category consists of targeted engine fault information; including the description and estimated risk-reduction factor for each identified fault. Risk-reduction factors are used to define and rank the potential merit of timely fault diagnoses. The second category is composed of candidate sensor information; including type, location, and estimated variance in normal operation. The final category includes the definition of fault scenarios characteristic of each targeted engine fault. These scenarios are defined in terms of engine model hardware parameters. Values of these parameters define engine simulations that generate expected sensor values for targeted fault scenarios. Taken together, this information provides an efficient condensation of the engineering experience and engine flow physics needed for sensor selection. The systematic sensor selection strategy is composed of three primary algorithms. The core of the selection process is a genetic algorithm that iteratively improves a defined quality measure of selected sensor suites. A merit algorithm is employed to compute the quality measure for each test sensor suite presented by the selection process. The quality measure is based on the fidelity of fault detection and the level of fault source discrimination provided by the test sensor suite. An inverse engine model, whose function is to derive hardware performance parameters from sensor data, is an integral part of the merit algorithm. The final component is a statistical evaluation algorithm that characterizes the impact of interference effects, such as control-induced sensor variation and sensor noise, on the probability of fault detection and isolation for optimal and near-optimal sensor suites.

Source record

Membrane-Based Gas Traps for Ammonia, Freon-21, and Water Systems to Simplify Ground Processing

Gas traps are critical for the smooth operation of coolant loops because gas bubbles can cause loss of centrifugal pump prime, interference with sensor readings, inhibition of heat transfer, and blockage of passages to remote systems. Coolant loops are ubiquitous in space flight hardware, and thus there is a great need for this technology. Conventional gas traps will not function in micro-gravity due to the absence of buoyancy forces. Therefore, clever designs that make use of adhesion and momentum are required for adequate separation, preferable in a single pass. The gas traps currently used in water coolant loops on the International Space Station are composed of membrane tube sets in a shell. Each tube set is composed of a hydrophilic membrane (used for water transport and capture of bubbles) and a hydrophobic membrane (used for venting of air bubbles). For the hydrophilic membrane, there are two critical pressures, the pressure drop and the bubble pressure. The pressure drop is the decrease in system pressure across the gas trap. The bubble pressure is the pressure required for air bubbles to pass across the water filled membrane. A significant difference between these pressures is needed to ensure complete capture of air bubbles in a single pass. Bubbles trapped by the device adsorb on the hydrophobic membrane in the interior of the hydrophilic membrane tube. After adsorption, the air is vented due to a pressure drop of approximately 1 atmosphere across the membrane. For water systems, the air is vented to the ambient (cabin). Because water vapor can also transport across the hydrophobic membrane, it is critical that a minimum surface area is used to avoid excessive water loss (would like to have a closed loop for the coolant). The currently used gas traps only provide a difference in pressure drop and bubble pressure of 3-4 psid. This makes the gas traps susceptible to failure at high bubble loading and if gas venting is impaired. One mechanism for the latter is when particles adhere to the hydrophobic membrane, promoting formation of a water layer about it that can blind the membrane for gas transport (Figure 1). This mechanism is the most probable cause for observed failures with the existing design. The objective of this project was to devise a strategy for choosing new membrane materials (database development and procedure), redesign of the gas trap to mitigate blinding effects, and to develop a design that can be used in ammonia and Freon-21 coolant loops.

Ritchie, Stephen M. C.

Risk of Performance Decrements and Adverse Health Outcomes Resulting from Sleep Loss, Circadian Desynchronization, and Work Overload

Sleep loss, circadian desynchronization, and work overload occur to some extent for ground and flight crews, prior to and during spaceflight missions. Ground evidence indicates that such risk factors may lead to performance decrements and adverse health outcomes, which could potentially compromise mission objectives. Efforts are needed to identify the environmental and mission conditions that interfere with sleep and circadian alignment, as well as individual differences in vulnerability and resiliency to sleep loss and circadian desynchronization. Specifically, this report highlights a collection of new evidence to better characterize the risk and reveals new gaps in this risk as follows: Sleep loss is apparent during spaceflight. Astronauts consistently average less sleep during spaceflight relative to on the ground. The causes of this sleep loss remain unknown, however ground-based evidence suggests that the sleep duration of astronauts is likely to lead to performance impairment and short and long-term health consequences. Further research is needed in this area in order to develop screening tools to assess individual astronaut sleep need in order to quantify the magnitude of sleep loss during spaceflight; current and planned efforts in BHP's research portfolio address this need. In addition, it is still unclear whether the conditions of spaceflight environment lead to sleep loss or whether other factors, such as work overload lead to the reduced sleep duration. Future data mining efforts and continued data collection on the ISS will help to further characterize factors contributing to sleep loss. Sleep inertia has not been evaluated during spaceflight. Ground-based studies confirm that it takes two to four hours to achieve optimal performance after waking from a sleep episode. Sleep inertia has been associated with increased accidents and reduced performance in operational environments. Sleep inertia poses considerable risk during spaceflight when emergency situations necessitate that crewmembers wake from sleep and make quick decisions. A recently completed BHP investigation assesses the effects of sleep inertia upon abrupt awakening, with and without hypnotics currently used in spaceflight; results from this investigation will help to inform strategies relative to sleep inertia effects on performance. Circadian desynchrony has been observed during spaceflight. Circadian desynchrony during spaceflight develops due to schedule constraints requiring non-24 operations or 'slam-shifts' and due to insufficient or mis-timed light exposure. In addition, circadian misalignment has been associated with reduced sleep duration and increased medication use. In ground-based studies, circadian desynchrony has been associated with significant performance impairment and increased risk of accidents when operations coincide with the circadian nadir. There is a great deal of information available on how to manage circadian misalignment, however, there are currently no easily collected biomarkers that can be used during spaceflight to determine circadian phase. Current research efforts are addressing this gap. Work overload has been documented during current spaceflight operations. NASA has established work hour guidelines that limit shift duration, however, schedule creep, where duty requirements necessitate working beyond scheduled work hours, has been reported. This observation warrants the documentation of actual work hours in order to improve planning and in order to ensure that astronauts receive adequate down time. In addition to concerns about work overload, ground based evidence suggests that work underload may be a concern during deep space missions, where torpor may develop and physically demanding workload will be exchanged for monitoring of autonomous systems. Given that increased automation is anticipated for exploration vehicles, fatigue effects in the context of such systems needs to be further understood. Performance metrics are needed to evaluate fitness-for-duty during spaceflight. Although ground-based evidence supports the notion that sleep loss, circadian desynchronization and work overload lead to performance impairment, inconsistency in the measures used to evaluate performance during spaceflight make it difficult to evaluate the magnitude of performance impairment during spaceflight. Work is underway to standardize measures of performance evaluation during spaceflight. Once established, such performance indicators need to be correlated with operational performance. Individual differences in sleep need and circadian preference, phase shifting ability and period have been documented in ground-based studies. Individual differences in response to sleep loss and circadian misalignment have also been documented and are presumed to be associated with genetic polymorphisms. No studies have systematically reported individual differences in sleep or circadian-related outcomes during spaceflight. More work is needed in this area in order to identify genetic or phenotypic biomarkers that predict resilience or vulnerability to sleep loss in order to personalize countermeasure strategies and mitigate performance impairment during spaceflight. Two laboratory and field investigations specific to this topic are currently ongoing; additional efforts, including an effort to mine existing biological data from spaceflight relative to sleep and circadian outcomes, are planned. Sex differences in sleep need and circadian period and phase have been reported in ground-based studies. The impact of these sex differences on performance is unclear. Sex differences in sleep need and circadian rhythms have not been systematically studied during spaceflight, presumably due to the small number of women that have flown in space. More research is needed in this area to evaluate whether any of the observed sex differences in physiology lead to altered performance in spaceflight and on the ground.

Flynn-Evans, Erin