Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “test case”

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.

At least 235 records · Page 13
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1993

Liquid propellant rocket engine combustion simulation with a time-accurate CFD method

Time-accurate computational fluid dynamics (CFD) algorithms are among the basic requirements as an engineering or research tool for realistic simulations of transient combustion phenomena, such as combustion instability, transient start-up, etc., inside the rocket engine combustion chamber. A time-accurate pressure based method is employed in the FDNS code for combustion model development. This is in connection with other program development activities such as spray combustion model development and efficient finite-rate chemistry solution method implementation. In the present study, a second-order time-accurate time-marching scheme is employed. For better spatial resolutions near discontinuities (e.g., shocks, contact discontinuities), a 3rd-order accurate TVD scheme for modeling the convection terms is implemented in the FDNS code. Necessary modification to the predictor/multi-corrector solution algorithm in order to maintain time-accurate wave propagation is also investigated. Benchmark 1-D and multidimensional test cases, which include the classical shock tube wave propagation problems, resonant pipe test case, unsteady flow development of a blast tube test case, and H2/O2 rocket engine chamber combustion start-up transient simulation, etc., are investigated to validate and demonstrate the accuracy and robustness of the present numerical scheme and solution algorithm.

Chen, Y. S.↗
DOE OSTI2020

VENTSAR V3.0: A Python GUI for Estimating Contaminant Concentrations on or Near Buildings Due to Building Effects and Plume Rise and For Calculating Inhalation and Plume Shine Doses

VENTSAR: Originated as VENTAX (Smith and Weber 1983) on the IBM Mainframe at the Savannah River Site (SRS) as a Fortran program. Updated to VENTSAR XL V1.0 (Simpkins 1997) as a spreadsheet version using macros created in Microsoft Excel. Later updated to VENTSAR XL V2.0 (Dixon 2018) as a spreadsheet executing a modified version of the original VENTAX Fortran code. Estimates contaminant concentrations on or near a building from a release at a nearby location. Calculates concentrations for a given meteorological exceedance probability or for a given stability and wind speed combination. Can model a single building with or without a penthouse on top or a ground location from either a stack or ground release. Plume rise can be considered. Contaminant releases can be chemical or radioactive with downwind concentrations determined at user-specified distances. Wind passing over and around buildings creates a complicated dispersion pattern. Air-intake vents may be located on building roofs or near the ground downwind of a release source. An estimation of pollutant concentrations on or near a structure is important in determining expected pollutant levels. Meteorological data are selected based on a specific area of the site. Fortran-based VENTAX able to make fast, complex mathematical calculations. Not user-friendly VENTSAR XL V1.0 no longer supported due to obsolete Excel macros. VENTSAR XL V2.0 an interim solution using an Excel spreadsheet to interface with the modified VENTAX Fortran code. Requires user to have Microsoft Excel. Not an intuitive interface for someone unfamiliar with VENTSAR. Does not perform dose calculations. VENTSAR V3.0 goal to combine the strengths of previous versions of VENTSAR into a single, powerful yet user-friendly program with a Graphical User Interface (GUI). Not dependent upon a specific program or plug-ins. Self-contained package to be used on any computer running Microsoft Windows. User-friendly, intuitive GUI created in Python for parameter input. Executes same modified VENTAX Fortran code as VENTSAR XL V2.0. Outputs formatted text file of completed calculations for easy review and dissemination. Performs inhalation and plume shine dose calculations for up to 11 user-selected nuclides from a nuclide dose factor library of almost 500 nuclides. 12 test cases were created for verification of V1.0 and V2.0. Same test cases run in V3.0 to verify correct performance. V3.0 produced similar results to V1.0. Confirmed GUI did not alter calculations in any way. Comparisons of the test case results confirm the V3.0 GUI does not influence the VENTSAR calculations. Simply passes same input parameters to VENTAX Fortran code for execution. Provides end user an easy-to-use, intuitive tool to quickly make building effect and plume rise calculations, as well as, inhalation and plume shine dose calculations. No experience with or working knowledge of Fortran, Excel, command line, or macros required. Self-contained package allows VENTSAR be deployed to any Windows computer without the need for specific programs or plug-ins.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS2016

Modeling in the State Flow Environment to Support Launch Vehicle Verification Testing for Mission and Fault Management Algorithms in the NASA Space Launch System

Analysis methods and testing processes are essential activities in the engineering development and verification of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) new Space Launch System (SLS). Central to mission success is reliable verification of the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the SLS launch vehicle (LV) flight software. This is particularly difficult because M&FM algorithms integrate and operate LV subsystems, which consist of diverse forms of hardware and software themselves, with equally diverse integration from the engineering disciplines of LV subsystems. M&FM operation of SLS requires a changing mix of LV automation. During pre-launch the LV is primarily operated by the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) organization with some LV automation of time-critical functions, and much more autonomous LV operations during ascent that have crucial interactions with the Orion crew capsule, its astronauts, and with mission controllers at the Johnson Space Center. M&FM algorithms must perform all nominal mission commanding via the flight computer to control LV states from pre-launch through disposal and also address failure conditions by initiating autonomous or commanded aborts (crew capsule escape from the failing LV), redundancy management of failing subsystems and components, and safing actions to reduce or prevent threats to ground systems and crew. To address the criticality of the verification testing of these algorithms, the NASA M&FM team has utilized the State Flow environment6 (SFE) with its existing Vehicle Management End-to-End Testbed (VMET) platform which also hosts vendor-supplied physics-based LV subsystem models. The human-derived M&FM algorithms are designed and vetted in Integrated Development Teams composed of design and development disciplines such as Systems Engineering, Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), liquid engines, and the astronaut crew office. Since the algorithms are realized using model-based engineering (MBE) methods from a hybrid of the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), SFE methods are a natural fit to provide an in depth analysis of the interactive behavior of these algorithms with the SLS LV subsystem models. For this, the M&FM algorithms and the SLS LV subsystem models are modeled using constructs provided by Matlab which also enables modeling of the accompanying interfaces providing greater flexibility for integrated testing and analysis, which helps forecast expected behavior in forward VMET integrated testing activities. In VMET, the M&FM algorithms are prototyped and implemented using the same C++ programming language and similar state machine architectural concepts used by the FSW group. Due to the interactive complexity of the algorithms, VMET testing thus far has verified all the individual M&FM subsystem algorithms with select subsystem vendor models but is steadily progressing to assessing the interactive behavior of these algorithms with LV subsystems, as represented by subsystem models. The novel SFE applications has proven to be useful for quick look analysis into early integrated system behavior and assessment of the M&FM algorithms with the modeled LV subsystems. This early MBE analysis generates vital insight into the integrated system behaviors, algorithm sensitivities, design issues, and has aided in the debugging of the M&FM algorithms well before full testing can begin in more expensive, higher fidelity but more arduous environments such as VMET, FSW testing, and the Systems Integration Lab7 (SIL). SFE has exhibited both expected and unexpected behaviors in nominal and off nominal test cases prior to full VMET testing. In many findings, these behavioral characteristics were used to correct the M&FM algorithms, enable better test coverage, and develop more effective test cases for each of the LV subsystems. This has improved the fidelity of testing and planning for the next generation of M&FM algorithms as the SLS program evolves from non-crewed to crewed flight, impacting subsystem configurations and the M&FM algorithms that control them. SFE analysis has improved robustness and reliability of the M&FM algorithms by revealing implementation errors and documentation inconsistencies. It is also improving planning efficiency for future VMET testing of the M&FM algorithms hosted in the LV flight computers, further reducing risk for the SLS launch infrastructure, the SLS LV, and most importantly the crew.

Trevino, Luis↗
DOE OSTI2014

Noiseless Vlasov–Poisson simulations with linearly transformed particles

We introduce a deterministic discrete-particle simulation approach, the Linearly-Transformed Particle-In-Cell (LTPIC) method, that employs linear deformations of the particles to reduce the noise traditionally associated with particle schemes. Formally, transforming the particles is justified by local first order expansions of the characteristic flow in phase space. In practice the method amounts of using deformation matrices within the particle shape functions; these matrices are updated via local evaluations of the forward numerical flow. Because it is necessary to periodically remap the particles on a regular grid to avoid excessively deforming their shapes, the method can be seen as a development of Denavit's Forward Semi-Lagrangian (FSL) scheme (Denavit, 1972 [8]). However, it has recently been established (Campos Pinto, 2012 [20]) that the underlying Linearly-Transformed Particle scheme converges for abstract transport problems, with no need to remap the particles; deforming the particles can thus be seen as a way to significantly lower the remapping frequency needed in the FSL schemes, and hence the associated numerical diffusion. To couple the method with electrostatic field solvers, two specific charge deposition schemes are examined, and their performance compared with that of the standard deposition method. Finally, numerical 1d1v simulations involving benchmark test cases and halo formation in an initially mismatched thermal sheet beam demonstrate some advantages of our LTPIC scheme over the classical PIC and FSL methods. Benchmarked test cases also indicate that, for numerical choices involving similar computational effort, the LTPIC method is capable of accuracy comparable to or exceeding that of state-of-the-art, high-resolution Vlasov schemes.

71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗
DOE OSTI2015

Using hybrid implicit Monte Carlo diffusion to simulate gray radiation hydrodynamics

This work describes how to couple a hybrid Implicit Monte Carlo Diffusion (HIMCD) method with a Lagrangian hydrodynamics code to evaluate the coupled radiation hydrodynamics equations. This HIMCD method dynamically applies Implicit Monte Carlo Diffusion (IMD) [1] to regions of a problem that are opaque and diffusive while applying standard Implicit Monte Carlo (IMC) [2] to regions where the diffusion approximation is invalid. We show that this method significantly improves the computational efficiency as compared to a standard IMC/Hydrodynamics solver, when optically thick diffusive material is present, while maintaining accuracy. Two test cases are used to demonstrate the accuracy and performance of HIMCD as compared to IMC and IMD. The first is the Lowrie semi-analytic diffusive shock [3]. The second is a simple test case where the source radiation streams through optically thin material and heats a thick diffusive region of material causing it to rapidly expand. We found that HIMCD proves to be accurate, robust, and computationally efficient for these test problems.

71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗
DOE OSTI2016

SHARP User Manual

SHARP is an advanced modeling and simulation toolkit for the analysis of nuclear reactors. It is comprised of several components including physical modeling tools, tools to integrate the physics codes for multi-physics analyses, and a set of tools to couple the codes within the MOAB framework. Physics modules currently include the neutronics code PROTEUS, the thermal-hydraulics code Nek5000, and the structural mechanics code Diablo. This manual focuses on performing multi-physics calculations with the SHARP ToolKit. Manuals for the three individual physics modules are available with the SHARP distribution to help the user to either carry out the primary multi-physics calculation with basic knowledge or perform further advanced development with in-depth knowledge of these codes. This manual provides step-by-step instructions on employing SHARP, including how to download and install the code, how to build the drivers for a test case, how to perform a calculation and how to visualize the results. Since SHARP has some specific library and environment dependencies, it is highly recommended that the user read this manual prior to installing SHARP. Verification tests cases are included to check proper installation of each module. It is suggested that the new user should first follow the step-by-step instructions provided for a test problem in this manual to understand the basic procedure of using SHARP before using SHARP for his/her own analysis. Both reference output and scripts are provided along with the test cases in order to verify correct installation and execution of the SHARP package. At the end of this manual, detailed instructions are provided on how to create a new test case so that user can perform novel multi-physics calculations with SHARP. Frequently asked questions are listed at the end of this manual to help the user to troubleshoot issues.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2018

Voltron Compatible Whole Building Root-Fault Detection and Diagnosis

Buildings consume more than 40% of primary energy in the U.S. Malfunctioning sensors, components, and control systems, as well as degrading components in Heating, Ventilating and Air-conditioning (HVAC) and lighting systems are main reasons for energy waste and unsatisfactory indoor environment. Field studies have shown that an energy saving of 5-30% of total building energy consumption and improved indoor air quality can be achieved by simply applying automated fault detection and diagnosis (AFDD), followed by corrections even if these are not done in real time. Extensive research has been made on the development of component level AFDD tools in the past two decades. However, in recent years, the development of method for a whole building level AFDD has received much attention. Here, a whole building fault refers to a fault happening in one subsystem but impact on more than one subsystems, or has a significant impact on building performances, such as building’s energy consumption. Existing component level AFDD tools could fail to detect or give false alarm for faults that trigger abnormalities in multiple subsystems. Isolating such whole building faults, which have impacts on multiple subsystems, is also challenging by simply using component based AFDD solutions. On the other hand, it might be more cost-effective for medium- or small-sized commercial buildings that have subsystems (e.g. primary cooling subsystem, air loop subsystem, heating subsystem, lighting subsystem, etc.) to install one whole building level AFDD tool, rather than many component level AFDD tools, to focus on significant faults. The focus of this project is firstly to provide training opportunities in building AFDD research area for undergraduate students and to develop a workforce pipeline in building sciences. The objective of the proposed research activities is to develop cost-effective and scalable AFDD solutions for whole building level faults. The developed AFDD solution is VOLTTRONTM compatible to further increase its plug-n-play capacity and the market penetration. VOLTTRONTM is an open-source innovative distributed control and sensing software platform developed by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. A VOLTTRONTM compatible AFDD tool brings the benefits such as low-cost deployment, and better building to grid integration, etc. The performance of the developed whole building AFDD tools is evaluated using data collected from a mixed-use medium-sized university campus building. Another significant goal of this project is to engage undergraduate students in research activities and expose them to building control and AFDD fields. A demonstration building – Nesbitt Hall at Drexel University is identified for this study. This demonstration building has a typical HVAC system configuration, which includes a water-cooled chiller system, three variable air volume (VAV) air handling unit (AHU) systems, and a hydronic heating system. Faults, that are expected to have a whole building level impact, are artificially implemented in this demonstration building for three different seasons. Building data have been collected in this project, which include fault free building automation system (BAS) data and BAS data that contain system behaviors caused by artificially implemented and naturally occurred faults. These collected data are used to evaluate the developed whole building AFDD tools. A data-driven method, which includes a weather and schedule-based pattern matching (WPM) method and Feature based Principal Component Analysis (FPCA) method, is developed for whole building level fault detection. Parameter sensitivity tests, including snapshot window size, data sample searching pool size, etc., are implemented to evaluate the impacts of various WPM-FPCA parameters. A data-driven and expert knowledge/rule-based method using Bayesian Network (BN) and WPM is developed for whole building level fault diagnosis. The developed WPM-BN method, which includes a two-layer BN structure model and BN parameters, are either learned from baseline data or developed from expert knowledge. The developed whole building AFDD tools are evaluated using BAS data collected from the demonstration building. Using the evaluation data set, the WPM-FPCA fault detection method is evaluated under two different Principle Component (PC) retention rates, i.e., 0.65 retention rate and 0.95 retention rate. It is observed that when using 0.65 PC retention rate, the WPM-FPCA fault detection method achieves a 79% fault detection rate (this rate reaches to 85% when including the six make-up fault test cases discussed in the next bullet), while when using 0.95 PC retention rate, the WPM-FPCA fault detection method achieves 100% fault detection rate (this rate remains to be 100% when including the six make-up fault test cases). Under both PC retention rates, the WPM-FPCA fault detection method demonstrates 0% false alarm rates. Using the evaluation data set, the developed WPM-BN fault diagnosis method has successfully diagnosed thirteen (13) faults out of the fourteen (14) fault test cases. The one mis-diagnosed case exhibits fewer fault symptoms in different subsystems, when compared with other fault test cases. Overall speaking, the developed whole building AFDD solutions demonstrate satisfactory fault detection/diagnosis accuracy with very low false alarm rate. Lastly, a survey and market study has been performed to understand the existing AFDD market, including its gaps and needs.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
NASA NTRS2015

A Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing and Analysis Platform for Validation of Mission and Fault Management Algorithms to Reduce Risk for NASAs Space Launch System

The engineering development of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) new Space Launch System (SLS) requires cross discipline teams with extensive knowledge of launch vehicle subsystems, information theory, and autonomous algorithms dealing with all operations from pre-launch through on orbit operations. The nominal and off-nominal characteristics of SLS's elements and subsystems must be understood and matched with the autonomous algorithm monitoring and mitigation capabilities for accurate control and response to abnormal conditions throughout all vehicle mission flight phases, including precipitating safing actions and crew aborts. This presents a large and complex systems engineering challenge, which is being addressed in part by focusing on the specific subsystems involved in the handling of off-nominal mission and fault tolerance with response management. Using traditional model-based system and software engineering design principles from the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the vehicle are crafted and vetted in Integrated Development Teams (IDTs) composed of multiple development disciplines such as Systems Engineering (SE), Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and the major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), and liquid engines. These model-based algorithms and their development lifecycle from inception through FSW certification are an important focus of SLS's development effort to further ensure reliable detection and response to off-nominal vehicle states during all phases of vehicle operation from pre-launch through end of flight. To test and validate these M&FM algorithms a dedicated test-bed was developed for full Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing (VMET). For addressing fault management (FM) early in the development lifecycle for the SLS program, NASA formed the M&FM team as part of the Integrated Systems Health Management and Automation Branch under the Spacecraft Vehicle Systems Department at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). To support the development of the FM algorithms, the VMET developed by the M&FM team provides the ability to integrate the algorithms, perform test cases, and integrate vendor-supplied physics-based launch vehicle (LV) subsystem models. Additionally, the team has developed processes for implementing and validating the M&FM algorithms for concept validation and risk reduction. The flexibility of the VMET capabilities enables thorough testing of the M&FM algorithms by providing configurable suites of both nominal and off-nominal test cases to validate the developed algorithms utilizing actual subsystem models such as MPS, GNC, and others. One of the principal functions of VMET is to validate the M&FM algorithms and substantiate them with performance baselines for each of the target vehicle subsystems in an independent platform exterior to the flight software test and validation processes. In any software development process there is inherent risk in the interpretation and implementation of concepts from requirements and test cases into flight software compounded with potential human errors throughout the development and regression testing lifecycle. Risk reduction is addressed by the M&FM group but in particular by the Analysis Team working with other organizations such as S&MA, Structures and Environments, GNC, Orion, Crew Office, Flight Operations, and Ground Operations by assessing performance of the M&FM algorithms in terms of their ability to reduce Loss of Mission (LOM) and Loss of Crew (LOC) probabilities. In addition, through state machine and diagnostic modeling, analysis efforts investigate a broader suite of failure effects and associated detection and responses to be tested in VMET to ensure reliable failure detection, and confirm responses do not create additional risks or cause undesired states through interactive dynamic effects with other algorithms and systems. VMET further contributes to risk reduction by prototyping and exercising the M&FM algorithms early in their implementation and without any inherent hindrances such as meeting FSW processor scheduling constraints due to their target platform - the ARINC 6535-partitioned Operating System, resource limitations, and other factors related to integration with other subsystems not directly involved with M&FM such as telemetry packing and processing. The baseline plan for use of VMET encompasses testing the original M&FM algorithms coded in the same C++ language and state machine architectural concepts as that used by FSW. This enables the development of performance standards and test cases to characterize the M&FM algorithms and sets a benchmark from which to measure their effectiveness and performance in the exterior FSW development and test processes. This paper is outlined in a systematic fashion analogous to a lifecycle process flow for engineering development of algorithms into software and testing. Section I describes the NASA SLS M&FM context, presenting the current infrastructure, leading principles, methods, and participants. Section II defines the testing philosophy of the M&FM algorithms as related to VMET followed by section III, which presents the modeling methods of the algorithms to be tested and validated in VMET. Its details are then further presented in section IV followed by Section V presenting integration, test status, and state analysis. Finally, section VI addresses the summary and forward directions followed by the appendices presenting relevant information on terminology and documentation.

Trevino, Luis↗
NASA NTRS2020

User's Guide for GAA_JET_FV (v1): A Jet Noise Prediction Code Based on the Generalized Acoustic Analogy

This document is a user’s guide for the jet noise prediction code GAA_JET_FV, which can be used to make predictions of turbulent mixing noise in high-speed free jets (ie. in the absence of any solid surfaces) of arbitrary cross section. The code requires a Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) solution for the mean flow and turbulence as input. A script is provided in the code package which can be used to interpolate structured or unstructured RANS solutions onto a structured grid suitable for the noise calculations. Output file formats for two commonly used RANS solvers are currently supported by this script. The document describes how the code can be obtained and installed on a user’s system. A simple test case is provided that can be run with minimal user knowledge of the code details. General instructions for running the interpolation script and the main code are given along with descriptions of the input and output data files and individual code modules. Several additional test cases are provided which allow the user to exercise additional features of the code. This document is Version 1, Revision 0 of the User’s Guide, which contains examples of round and non-axisymmetric unheated jet test cases. Future versions are planned which will include additional functionality for the code and more complex test cases.

Jet Noise↗
NASA NTRS1999

Installed Transonic 2D Nozzle Nacelle Boattail Drag Study

The Transonic Nozzle Boattail Drag Study was initiated in 1995 to develop an understanding of how external nozzle transonic aerodynamics effect airplane performance and how strongly those effects are dependent on nozzle configuration (2D vs. axisymmetric). MDC analyzed the axisymmetric nozzle. Boeing subcontracted Northrop-Grumman to analyze the 2D nozzle. AU participants analyzed the AGARD nozzle as a check-out and validation case. Once the codes were checked out and the gridding resolution necessary for modeling the separated flow in this region determined, the analysis moved to the installed wing/body/nacelle/diverter cases. The boat tail drag validation case was the AGARD B.4 rectangular nozzle. This test case offered both test data and previous CFD analyses for comparison. Results were obtained for test cases B.4.1 (M=0.6) and B.4.2 (M=0.938) and compared very well with the experimental data. Once the validation was complete a CFD grid was constructed for the full Ref. H configuration (wing/body/nacelle/diverter) using a combination of patched and overlapped (Chimera) grids. This was done to ensure that the grid topologies and density would be adequate for the full model. The use of overlapped grids allowed the same grids from the full configuration model to be used for the wing/body alone cases, thus eliminating the risk of grid differences affecting the determination of the installation effects. Once the full configuration model was run and deemed to be suitable the nacelle/diverter grids were removed and the wing/body analysis performed. Reference H wing/body results were completed for M=0.9 (a=0.0, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0 and 8.0), M=1.1 (a=4.0 and 6.0) and M=2.4 (a=0.0, 2.0, 4.4, 6.0 and 8.0). Comparisons of the M=0.9 and M=2.4 cases were made with available wind tunnel data and overall comparisons were good. The axi-inlet/2D nozzle nacelle was analyzed isolated. The isolated nacelle data coupled with the wing/body result enabled the interference effects of the installed nacelles to be determined. Isolated nacelle mm were made at M=0.9 and M=1.1 for both the supersonic and transonic nozzle settings. AU of the isolated nacelle cases were run at alpha=0. Full configuration runs were to be made at Mach numbers of 0.9, 1.1, and 2.4 (the same as the wing/body and isolated nacelles). Both the isolated nacelles and installed nacelles were run with inlet conditions designed to give zero spillage. This was to be done in order to isolate the boattail effects as much as possible. Full configuration runs with the supersonic nozzles were completed for M=0.9 and 1.1 at a=4.0 and 6.0 (4 runs total) and with the transonic nozzles at M=0.9 and 1.1 at a=2.0, 4.0 and 6.0 (6 runs total). Drag breakdowns were completed for the M=0.9 and M= 1.1 showing favorable interference drag for both cases.

Malone, Michael B.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Assessment of Numerical and Modeling Errors of RANS based Transition Models for Low-Reynolds Numbers 2-D Flows

In this paper we report the outcome of selected workshops organized as part of the NATO Applied Vehicle Technology (AVT)-313 activity Incompressible Laminar-to-Turbulent Flow Transition Study that focused on assessing the numerical and modeling accuracy of the γ−Reθ and γ transition models coupled to the k−ω Shear-Stress Transport (SST) two-equation eddy-viscosity model. Three different test cases involving nominally 2D flow configurations were selected: flow over a flat plate with two different levels of turbulence intensity at the inlet; flow around the Eppler 387 foil at a Reynolds number of 3×10^5 and angles of attack of 1 deg. and 7 deg. flow around the NACA 0015 foil at a Reynolds number of 1.8×10^5 and angles of attack of 5 deg. and10 deg. The flat plate flow conditions correspond to natural and by-pass transition, whereas the other two test cases include laminar separation bubbles that lead to separation-induced transition. For each test case, the selected quantities of interest include both integral and local flow quantities. Geometrically similar grids with a wide range of grid refinement ratios were generated for each of the test cases to allow the estimation of numerical uncertainties for all quantities of interest selected for this study. Several RANS flow solvers were used, employing common grids with the same boundary conditions and mathematical models. Therefore, it is possible to analyze the consistency of the results, i.e., to check if the intervals defined by the different numerical solutions with their respective uncertainties overlap with each other. Modeling errors can also be addressed for the selected flow quantities that have experimental data available. However, the experimental information available in these cases is not sufficient to guarantee that experiments and simulations are performed with the same settings. Nonetheless, the available experimental data is sufficient to guarantee that modeling errors are significantly reduced with the use of the transition models when compared to simulations performed using only the k−ω SST model.

CFD Modeling↗
NASA NTRS1990

Automated unit-level testing with heuristic rules

Software testing plays a significant role in the development of complex software systems. Current testing methods generally require significant effort to generate meaningful test cases. The QUEST/Ada system is a prototype system designed using CLIPS to experiment with expert system based test case generation. The prototype is designed to test for condition coverage, and attempts to generate test cases to cover all feasible branches contained in an Ada program. This paper reports on heuristics sued by the system. These heuristics vary according to the amount of knowledge obtained by preprocessing and execution of the boolean conditions in the program.

Carlisle, W. Homer↗
NASA NTRS2021

Report on Workshop on Artificial Intelligence in Strategic Planning and Science Prioritization

This report details the observations from a two-day virtual workshop, held May 12-13, 2020, focused on whether, and how, artificial intelligence (AI) could assist humans in strategic planning, specifically in science and technology prioritization. The participants identified several “key challenges” that AI might tackle in this area. To further understand the value of these key challenges the workshop then developed related test cases that would demonstrate specifically how AI/machine learning (ML) could provide assistance to humans. Approximately 40 subject matter experts (SMEs), with backgrounds in AI, strategic planning for science, and scientific data, were gathered for the conference. This report collates the details of the output of the workshop. The “best” test cases include (in no particular order):Use of AI to assist in selecting Decadal Survey priorities. * Use of AI to identify new, or previously unidentified, science topics for prioritization. * Using AI to better label and increase discoverability of scientific literature and proposals. * Use of AI to enhance current observation capabilities for scientific missions. * Using AI to mitigate biases in selection of proposal reviewers and membership of advisory committees. Examination of these test cases indicates that Natural Language Processing (NLP) is a common capability found in most of the ”best” (top-rated) test cases and is a valuable, multi-purpose tool which enables ML in this area.

strategic planning↗
NASA NTRS2015

A Vehicle Management End-to-End Testing and Analysis Platform for Validation of Mission and Fault Management Algorithms to Reduce Risk for NASA's Space Launch System

The engineering development of the new Space Launch System (SLS) launch vehicle requires cross discipline teams with extensive knowledge of launch vehicle subsystems, information theory, and autonomous algorithms dealing with all operations from pre-launch through on orbit operations. The characteristics of these spacecraft systems must be matched with the autonomous algorithm monitoring and mitigation capabilities for accurate control and response to abnormal conditions throughout all vehicle mission flight phases, including precipitating safing actions and crew aborts. This presents a large and complex system engineering challenge, which is being addressed in part by focusing on the specific subsystems involved in the handling of off-nominal mission and fault tolerance with response management. Using traditional model based system and software engineering design principles from the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the vehicle are crafted and vetted in specialized Integrated Development Teams (IDTs) composed of multiple development disciplines such as Systems Engineering (SE), Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and the major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), and liquid engines. These model based algorithms and their development lifecycle from inception through Flight Software certification are an important focus of this development effort to further insure reliable detection and response to off-nominal vehicle states during all phases of vehicle operation from pre-launch through end of flight. NASA formed a dedicated M&FM team for addressing fault management early in the development lifecycle for the SLS initiative. As part of the development of the M&FM capabilities, this team has developed a dedicated testbed that integrates specific M&FM algorithms, specialized nominal and off-nominal test cases, and vendor-supplied physics-based launch vehicle subsystem models. Additionally, the team has developed processes for implementing and validating these algorithms for concept validation and risk reduction for the SLS program. The flexibility of the Vehicle Management End-to-end Testbed (VMET) enables thorough testing of the M&FM algorithms by providing configurable suites of both nominal and off-nominal test cases to validate the developed algorithms utilizing actual subsystem models such as MPS. The intent of VMET is to validate the M&FM algorithms and substantiate them with performance baselines for each of the target vehicle subsystems in an independent platform exterior to the flight software development infrastructure and its related testing entities. In any software development process there is inherent risk in the interpretation and implementation of concepts into software through requirements and test cases into flight software compounded with potential human errors throughout the development lifecycle. Risk reduction is addressed by the M&FM analysis group working with other organizations such as S&MA, Structures and Environments, GNC, Orion, the Crew Office, Flight Operations, and Ground Operations by assessing performance of the M&FM algorithms in terms of their ability to reduce Loss of Mission and Loss of Crew probabilities. In addition, through state machine and diagnostic modeling, analysis efforts investigate a broader suite of failure effects and associated detection and responses that can be tested in VMET to ensure that failures can be detected, and confirm that responses do not create additional risks or cause undesired states through interactive dynamic effects with other algorithms and systems. VMET further contributes to risk reduction by prototyping and exercising the M&FM algorithms early in their implementation and without any inherent hindrances such as meeting FSW processor scheduling constraints due to their target platform - ARINC 653 partitioned OS, resource limitations, and other factors related to integration with other subsystems not directly involved with M&FM such as telemetry packing and processing. The baseline plan for use of VMET encompasses testing the original M&FM algorithms coded in the same C++ language and state machine architectural concepts as that used by Flight Software. This enables the development of performance standards and test cases to characterize the M&FM algorithms and sets a benchmark from which to measure the effectiveness of M&FM algorithms performance in the FSW development and test processes.

Trevino, Luis↗
NASA NTRS1993

The 1992-1993 advanced design program. Part 1: The Mars methane engine project. Part 2: The Mars oxygen processor new furnace

Three constituents of the Martian atmosphere, methane, carbon dioxide, and oxygen, can be used for internal combustion in engines utilized for future space exploration on Mars. These three gases, considered as the test case in this research, will be examined to determine required flow rates needed for combustion and optimization of engine performance. Results of the test case are examined in relation to a base case of methane and air for comparative purposes. Testing of exhaust temperatures, cylinder pressure, and exhaust gas analysis were performed for the base case and test case. Also described is a study utilizing a zirconia cell to convert carbon dioxide into usable oxygen to help support future Mars missions.

Lauer, Stephen↗
DOE OSTI2017

Improvement of the RELAP5-3D Model of Condensation in the Presence of Noncondensables

Condensation of steam on the primary side of a steam generator in a pressurized water reactor (PWR) is one means of removing decay heat during some accident scenarios, including small break loss of coolant accident (SBLOCA). However, when noncondensable gasses mix with steam, it impairs condensation. To correctly predict plant behavior, nuclear power plant (NPP) safety analysis codes such as RELAP5-3D must model the effect of condensation in the presence of noncondensables properly. A potential error in the RELAP5-3D code was reported in the condensation model in the presence of noncondensables by the University of Wisconsin (Fu 2015). The report indicated that the calculated condensation heat flux was under-predicted due to the modeling of the mass transfer in the gas mixture. The original documentation describing the implementation of the model was reviewed and compared with alternative formulations. An alternative that uses saturation vapor density at temperature of total pressure instead of the saturation vapor density at vapor partial pressure for calculating vapor mass flux was implemented. Comparison of the alternative method with the original against experimental data for several test cases showed improvement for most test cases.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Impact of Time Dependent Reactor and Sensor Physics on Core Power Synthesis

Online synthesis of the power distribution is critical in the operation and control of nuclear power reactors to ensure that the core is operating within safety margins, and to provide essential knowledge associated with the burnup of the fuel. In light water reactors (LWRs), power synthesis is achieved by using some a priori knowledge of the state of the reactor core and updating based on the signals coming from in-core sensors—namely, self-powered neutron detectors (SPNDs). This report aims to study the effects of fuel burnup and sensor degradation on the ability to accurately synthesize the power distribution in a LWR. Several modeling tools were used to simulate power synthesis based on the responses of SPNDs, with emitters made out of Rh or V. A representative pressurized water reactor low-enriched uranium (LEU) core was modeled using the Polaris/Purdue Advanced Reactor Core Simulator (PARCS) approach. The Monte Carlo N-Particle Transport 6 (MCNP6) code was used, as well, to calculate response functions between different segments of fuel to individual SPNDs; this is a crucial parameter for power synthesis. The Oak Ridge Isotope GENeration (ORIGEN) package in the Standardized Computer Analyses for Licensing Evaluation (SCALE) code was used to model the time-dependent isotopic transmutation in the SPND emitters. All these data were fed into a custom code that enacted the point-based iterative (PBI) method to simulate power synthesis. Developmental work was also performed on high-fidelity SPND models in the GEometry ANd Tracking 4 (Geant4) code, which enables higher-accuracy modeling of the current responses from SPNDs. In this work, five sets of time-dependent power synthesis test cases were conducted. In these test cases, systematic changes in the input conditions enabled an analysis of the effect of (1) slightly inaccurate a priori power distribution assumptions with respect to fuel burnup, (2) highly inaccurate a priori assumptions with respect to fuel burnup (such that burnup is not included in the a priori assumed distribution), and (3) differences between Rh and V SPNDs in terms of downstream consequences of the transmutation in the emitters. The authors discovered that one may permissibly have slightly inaccurate a priori assumptions of the fuel burnup (such that the level of burnup may be slightly under- or over-approximated by the accumulated burnup in approximately 9.3 full power days), but to not account for burnup at all in the a priori assumption leads to severe levels of error, approaching 25% at maximum. The authors also discovered that V SPNDs are extraordinarily robust in the low-enriched uranium fuel cycle considered in this modeling work, whereas Rh SPNDs undergo significant transmutation that can result in large errors in the synthesized power distribution.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗