Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Prototype Verification System”

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 271 records · Page 15

NTP comparison process

The systems engineering process for the concept definition phase of the program involves requirements definition, system definition, and consistent concept definition. The requirements definition process involves obtaining a complete understanding of the system requirements based on customer needs, mission scenarios, and nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP) operating characteristics. A system functional analysis is performed to provide a comprehensive traceability and verification of top-level requirements down to detailed system specifications and provides significant insight into the measures of system effectiveness to be utilized in system evaluation. The second key element in the process is the definition of system concepts to meet the requirements. This part of the process involves engine system and reactor contractor teams to develop alternative NTP system concepts that can be evaluated against specific attributes, as well as a reference configuration against which to compare system benefits and merits. Quality function deployment (QFD), as an excellent tool within Total Quality Management (TQM) techniques, can provide the required structure and provide a link to the voice of the customer in establishing critical system qualities and their relationships. The third element of the process is the consistent performance comparison. The comparison process involves validating developed concept data and quantifying system merits through analysis, computer modeling, simulation, and rapid prototyping of the proposed high risk NTP subsystems. The maximum amount possible of quantitative data will be developed and/or validated to be utilized in the QFD evaluation matrix. If upon evaluation of a new concept or its associated subsystems determine to have substantial merit, those features will be incorporated into the reference configuration for subsequent system definition and comparison efforts.

Corban, Robert↗

Advanced Extravehicular Activity Pressure Garment Requirements Development

The NASA Johnson Space Center advanced pressure garment technology development team is addressing requirements development for exploration missions. Lessons learned from the Z‐2 high fidelity prototype development have reiterated that clear low‐level requirements and verification methods reduce risk to the government, improve efficiency in pressure garment design efforts, and enable the government to be a smart buyer. The expectation is to provide requirements at the specification level that are validated so that their impact on pressure garment design is understood. Additionally, the team will provide defined verification protocols for the requirements. However, in reviewing exploration space suit high level requirements there are several gaps in the team's ability to define and verify related lower level requirements. This paper addresses the efforts in requirement areas such as mobility/fit/comfort and environmental protection (dust, radiation, plasma, secondary impacts) to determine the by what method the requirements can be defined and use of those methods for verification. Gaps exist at various stages. In some cases component level work is underway, but no system level effort has begun, in other cases no effort has been initiated to close the gap. Status of ongoing efforts and potential approaches to open gaps are discussed.

Ross, Amy↗

Advanced Extra-Vehicular Activity Pressure Garment Requirements Development

The NASA Johnson Space Center advanced pressure garment technology development team is addressing requirements development for exploration missions. Lessons learned from the Z-2 high fidelity prototype development have reiterated that clear low-level requirements and verification methods reduce risk to the government, improve efficiency in pressure garment design efforts, and enable the government to be a smart buyer. The expectation is to provide requirements at the specification level that are validated so that their impact on pressure garment design is understood. Additionally, the team will provide defined verification protocols for the requirements. However, in reviewing exploration space suit high level requirements there are several gaps in the team's ability to define and verify related lower level requirements. This paper addresses the efforts in requirement areas such as mobility/fit/comfort and environmental protection (dust, radiation, plasma, secondary impacts) to determine the method by which the requirements can be defined and use of those methods for verification. Gaps exist at various stages. In some cases component level work is underway, but no system level effort has begun; in other cases no effort has been initiated to close the gap. Status of on-going efforts and potential approaches to open gaps are discussed.

Ross, Amy↗

Advanced Manufacturing Techniques Demonstrated for Fabricating Developmental Hardware

NASA Glenn Research Center's Engineering Development Division has been working in support of innovative gas turbine engine systems under development by Glenn's Combustion Branch. These one-of-a-kind components require operation under extreme conditions. High-temperature ceramics were chosen for fabrication was because of the hostile operating environment. During the designing process, it became apparent that traditional machining techniques would not be adequate to produce the small, intricate features for the conceptual design, which was to be produced by stacking over a dozen thin layers with many small features that would then be aligned and bonded together into a one-piece unit. Instead of using traditional machining, we produced computer models in Pro/ENGINEER (Parametric Technology Corporation (PTC), Needham, MA) to the specifications of the research engineer. The computer models were exported in stereolithography standard (STL) format and used to produce full-size rapid prototype polymer models. These semi-opaque plastic models were used for visualization and design verification. The computer models also were exported in International Graphics Exchange Specification (IGES) format and sent to Glenn's Thermal/Fluids Design & Analysis Branch and Applied Structural Mechanics Branch for profiling heat transfer and mechanical strength analysis.

Redding, Chip↗

Development of Methodologies for IV and V of Neural Networks

Non-deterministic systems often rely upon neural network (NN) technology to "lean" to manage flight systems under controlled conditions using carefully chosen training sets. How can these adaptive systems be certified to ensure that they will become increasingly efficient and behave appropriately in real-time situations? The bulk of Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) research of non-deterministic software control systems such as Adaptive Flight Controllers (AFC's) addresses NNs in well-behaved and constrained environments such as simulations and strict process control. However, neither substantive research, nor effective IV&V techniques have been found to address AFC's learning in real-time and adapting to live flight conditions. Adaptive flight control systems offer good extensibility into commercial aviation as well as military aviation and transportation. Consequently, this area of IV&V represents an area of growing interest and urgency. ISR proposes to further the current body of knowledge to meet two objectives: Research the current IV&V methods and assess where these methods may be applied toward a methodology for the V&V of Neural Network; and identify effective methods for IV&V of NNs that learn in real-time, including developing a prototype test bed for IV&V of AFC's. Currently. no practical method exists. lSR will meet these objectives through the tasks identified and described below. First, ISR will conduct a literature review of current IV&V technology. TO do this, ISR will collect the existing body of research on IV&V of non-deterministic systems and neural network. ISR will also develop the framework for disseminating this information through specialized training. This effort will focus on developing NASA's capability to conduct IV&V of neural network systems and to provide training to meet the increasing need for IV&V expertise in such systems.

Taylor, Brian↗

IDAES-PSE 2.0 Release

The Institute for the Design of Advanced Energy Systems (IDAES) Integrated Platform is a versatile computational environment offering extensive process systems engineering (PSE) capabilities for optimizing the design and operation of complex, interacting technologies and systems. IDAES enables users to efficiently search vast, complex design spaces to discover the lowest cost, most environmentally sustainable solutions while supporting the full process modeling lifecycle, from conceptual design to dynamic optimization and control. The extensible, open platform empowers users to create models of novel processes and rapidly develop custom analyses, workflows, and end-user applications. IDAES-PSE 2.0.0 Release Highlights Removal of deprecated features from IDAES v1 Update to Pyomo v6.5 – this required a number of updates to support the new NL solver writer and to address some changes in Pyomo Creation of new testing suite for backward compatibility, model robustness and verification More general implementation of the Helmholtz EoS. This brings some new features like standard property diagrams, choice of mass or mole basis, and new state variable options Standardizing names in Heat Exchanger models (breaking change from v2.0.0a2): Control Volumes named hot_side and cold_side Ports names hot_side_inlet, hot_side_outlet, cold_side_inlet and cold_side_outlet Config Blocks names hot_side_config and cold_side_config Config arguments for user provided names for each side: hot_side_name and cold_side_name. Updating Keras surrogate tool to use v1.1 of OMLT New prototype API for model initialization (idaes.core.initialization) The new API uses "Model Initializer" objects instead of class methods, allowing for the definition of multiple initialization routines for a single model A number of common, model agnostic initialization routines have also been defined, including initialization from data, block-decomposition and a general hierarchical approach equivalent to the existing method for common unit models New metadata for thermophysical properties – valid_range This can be used to record the range of values over which a property value can be trusted, such as the range of experimental data used to regress parameters A number of new utility functions have been added to check for properties with values outside the valid range and to set bounds based on this metadata Updated construction of balance expressions in Control Volumes to remove unneeded terms In the past, unneeded terms were added as a constant 0 term, however they will now be dropped entirely from the expression This was necessary due to more strict unit checking in the new Pyomo solver writer which no longer ignores 0 terms Updates to metadata for thermophysical properties to better define known properties and units of measurement This results in more strict enforcement of standard naming for thermophysical and reaction properties Users can still define custom properties, but these must be done explicitly using the define_custom_properties() method instead of being implicitly created by add_property() Updated convergence tester utility tool to support definition of benchmark files (JSON format) and comparison of performance to benchmarks Set default iteration limit for IPOPT in IDAES config to 200 iterations Update scaling of example models to work with new Pyomo NL solver writer Improve testing of extensions and examples infrastructure to avoid need for downloading files Updated distillation column to centralize common functionality and remove a number of Pyomo warnings

IDAES↗

Using virtual reality for science mission planning: A Mars Pathfinder case

NASA's Mars Pathfinder Project requires a Ground Data System (GDS) that supports both engineering and scientific payloads with reduced mission operations staffing, and short planning schedules. Also, successful surface operation of the lander camera requires efficient mission planning and accurate pointing of the camera. To meet these challenges, a new software strategy that integrates virtual reality technology with existing navigational ancillary information and image processing capabilities. The result is an interactive workstation based applications software that provides a high resolution, 3-dimensial, stereo display of Mars as if it were viewed through the lander camera. The design, implementation strategy and parametric specification phases for the development of this software were completed, and the prototype tested. When completed, the software will allow scientists and mission planners to access simulated and actual scenes of Mars' surface. The perspective from the lander camera will enable scientists to plan activities more accurately and completely. The application will also support the sequence and command generation process and will allow testing and verification of camera pointing commands via simulation.

Kim, Jacqueline H.↗

Heterogeneous Integration Technologies for High-temperature, High-density, Low-profile Power Modules of Wide Bandgap Devices in Electric Drive Applications (Final Technical Report)

The goal of this project is to develop packaging technologies for making high-temperature, high-density, and low-profile wide-bandgap (WBG) power electronics modules for electric drives. These modules are aimed at enabling the DOE’s University Consortium to reach its 2025 inverter targets of ≥ 100 kW/L and ≤ 2.7 $/kW. The specific objectives are to: design and fabricate SiC half-bridge power modules with double-sided cooling and parasitic inductances < 5 nH, heat flux density > 400 W/cm 2 , and working junction temperature of 200 o C; design, fabricate, and deliver a gate driver with double-sided cooled modules for the construction of a 100 kW/L inverter at Oak Ridge National Lab; and design and prototype intelligent gate drivers with integrated current sensor and a low-profile DC-DC power supply with air-core transformer for testing power modules at 200 o C junction temperature. We followed an iterative technical approach of design, simulation, fabrication, and testing of various versions of modules, current sensors, and power supply. The state-of-the-art silicon carbide devices rated at 1.2 kV and 149 A were packaged by sintered-silver bonding on an aluminum nitride direct-bond-copper substrate for high thermal conductivity, high working temperature, and high joint reliability. Porous silver posts were used to interconnect the device’s source pads to the other direct-bond-copper substrate for low mechanical stresses, ease of manufacturing, and double-sided cooling. A current sensor based on package parasitic inductance was developed to measure switching current. A dynamic feedback scheme was developed to compensate the effect of parasitic resistance and temperature variation. A constant-current class-E dc-dc converter with air-core transformer was developed. Air-core transformer was used due to the unavailability of magnetic core at high temperatures. Gate driver and power supply were integrated with the double-side cooled, high temperature SiC power modules for testing the modules at 200 o C junction temperature. Double-pulse and continuous testing of the integrated technologies validated the design and fabrication of the three component technologies. Throughout the project, we overcame the challenge for design verification caused by low prototyping yield, which then helped train the graduate students, the future workforce, to learn the engineering know-how for low-cost manufacturing of reliable products. Below is a summary of the major accomplishments of this project: development of a prototyping process for fabricating double-side cooled (1200 V, 149 A) SiC phase-leg modules capable of working to 200 o C Tj; simulation and experimental verification of the improvement of thermo-mechanical reliability of the double-side cooled SiC phase-leg module by using rigid encapsulant; design and experimental validation of a current sensor based on package parasitic inductance and a compensation solution for eliminating the effect of parasitic resistance; design and experimental validation of a low-profile power supply with six-output air-core transformer for gate driver; functional demonstration of a SiC phase-leg module integrated with its gate driver, current sensor, and an air-core power supply at 200 o C Tj in a double-pulse switching test setup and Buck converter continuous test setup; successful completion of six PhD and two MS students who are or will work at Apple Inc., Tesla Inc., Wolfspeed Inc., Microchip Inc., Monolithic Power Systems Inc., and LG Magna Inc.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Space Suit Portable Life Support System (PLSS) 2.0 Pre-Installation Acceptance (PIA) Testing

Following successful completion of the space suit Portable Life Support System (PLSS) 1.0 development and testing in 2011, the second system-level prototype, PLSS 2.0, was developed in 2012 to continue the maturation of the advanced PLSS design which is intended to reduce consumables, improve reliability and robustness, and incorporate additional sensing and functional capabilities over the current Space Shuttle/International Space Station Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) PLSS. PLSS 2.0 represents the first attempt at a packaged design comprising first generation or later component prototypes and medium fidelity interfaces within a flight-like representative volume. Pre-Installation Acceptance (PIA) is carryover terminology from the Space Shuttle Program referring to the series of test sequences used to verify functionality of the EMU PLSS prior to installation into the Space Shuttle airlock for launch. As applied to the PLSS 2.0 development and testing effort, PIA testing designated the series of 27 independent test sequences devised to verify component and subsystem functionality, perform in situ instrument calibrations, generate mapping data to define set-points for control algorithms, evaluate hardware performance against advanced PLSS design requirements, and provide quantitative and qualitative feedback on evolving design requirements and performance specifications. PLSS 2.0 PIA testing was carried out from 3/20/13 - 3/15/14 using a variety of test configurations to perform test sequences that ranged from stand-alone component testing to system-level testing, with evaluations becoming increasingly integrated as the test series progressed. Each of the 27 test sequences was vetted independently, with verification of basic functionality required before completion. Because PLSS 2.0 design requirements were evolving concurrently with PLSS 2.0 PIA testing, the requirements were used as guidelines to assess performance during the tests; after the completion of PIA testing, test data served to improve the fidelity and maturity of design requirements as well as plans for future advanced PLSS functional testing.

Watts, Carly↗

Space Suit Portable Life Support System (PLSS) 2.0 Pre-Installation Acceptance (PIA) Testing

Following successful completion of the space suit Portable Life Support System (PLSS) 1.0 development and testing in 2011, the second system-level prototype, PLSS 2.0, was developed in 2012 to continue the maturation of the advanced PLSS design. This advanced PLSS is intended to reduce consumables, improve reliability and robustness, and incorporate additional sensing and functional capabilities over the current Space Shuttle/International Space Station Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) PLSS. PLSS 2.0 represents the first attempt at a packaged design comprising first generation or later component prototypes and medium fidelity interfaces within a flight-like representative volume. Pre-Installation Acceptance (PIA) is carryover terminology from the Space Shuttle Program referring to the series of test sequences used to verify functionality of the EMU PLSS prior to installation into the Space Shuttle airlock for launch. As applied to the PLSS 2.0 development and testing effort, PIA testing designated the series of 27 independent test sequences devised to verify component and subsystem functionality, perform in situ instrument calibrations, generate mapping data, define set-points, evaluate control algorithms, evaluate hardware performance against advanced PLSS design requirements, and provide quantitative and qualitative feedback on evolving design requirements and performance specifications. PLSS 2.0 PIA testing was carried out in 2013 and 2014 using a variety of test configurations to perform test sequences that ranged from stand-alone component testing to system-level testing, with evaluations becoming increasingly integrated as the test series progressed. Each of the 27 test sequences was vetted independently, with verification of basic functionality required before completion. Because PLSS 2.0 design requirements were evolving concurrently with PLSS 2.0 PIA testing, the requirements were used as guidelines to assess performance during the tests; after the completion of PIA testing, test data served to improve the fidelity and maturity of design requirements as well as plans for future advanced PLSS functional testing.

Anchondo, Ian↗

Active High Assurance Authentication Protocol (AHAAP)

The AHAAP Maturation Project involves maturation and evaluation of a patented zero-trust tamper-resistant high-assurance session-less dynamic and active device authentication protocol that simultaneously authenticates identity and provides integrity verification in a single step, substantially reducing the risk of cyberattack, and eliminating the need for costly and complex conventional communication security systems requirements (i.e., cryptography, Public Key Infrastructure (PKI), and key management). These cybersecurity attributes of the technology must be preserved when applying the technology to different cybersecurity solutions, including Command & Control (C&C), Over-the-Air (OTA) update, Common Access Card (CAC), and distributed energy resource (DER) implementations, among others. The technology research objective is to test and verify that the cybersecurity attributes of the technology are not degraded in different cybersecurity applications. The primary technology development objective is to build minimum viable products to demonstrate the technology addresses today’s cybersecurity threats so that prospective investors, strategic partners, regulatory agencies, and commercial customers can interact with and assess the protection assured by the technology. The AHAAP Maturation Project goal is to develop, test, and validate one or more AHAAP implementations. The AHAAP Maturation Project tasks are: (i) engineer AHAAP implementation software, (ii) build a functional prototype that implements the AHAAP software for demonstration, testing, analysis, and evaluation purposes, and (iii) generate a report detailing the results of the AHAAP C&C software and hardware implementation. The final project deliverables are: (i) AHAAP software implementation and prototype, (ii) a report from Sandia National Laboratories detailing the results of the AHAAP implementations.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

SILHIL Replication of Electric Aircraft Powertrain Dynamics and Inner-Loop Control for V&V of System Health Management Routines

Software-in-the-loop and Hardware-in-the-loop testing of failure prognostics and decision making tools for aircraft systems will facilitate more comprehensive and cost-effective testing than what is practical to conduct with flight tests. A framework is described for the offline recreation of dynamic loads on simulated or physical aircraft powertrain components based on a real-time simulation of airframe dynamics running on a flight simulator, an inner-loop flight control policy executed by either an autopilot routine or a human pilot, and a supervisory fault management control policy. The creation of an offline framework for verifying and validating supervisory failure prognostics and decision making routines is described for the example of battery charge depletion failure scenarios onboard a prototype electric unmanned aerial vehicle.

Verification and Validation↗

Blind Study Validating Parametric Costing Tools PRICE TruePlanning and SEER-H for NASA Science Missions

Two of the primary parametric costing tools used to estimate the development and production cost of future spacecraft hardware are PRICE TruePlanning - Space Missions Catalog by PRICE Systems, and SEER-H by Galorath. These are standard tools used by NASA and industry to estimate the cost of new aerospace hardware. However, no independent verification of the accuracy of these tools is publicly available. Both PRICE Systems and Galorath have completed internal validation studies of their parametric cost estimating tools; however, they only provided the results of the studies and did not detail the exact methods used to perform the validation. In the present study, cost estimators used PRICE TruePlanning and SEER-H to estimate the cost of twelve different past NASA science missions. The estimators were prevented from knowing the actual cost of the missions in an effort to minimize cognitive biases. In the present study, SEER had an average error of 23%, median error of -0.3%, with a standard deviation of 43%. PRICE had an average error of 52%, median error of 50%, and standard deviation of 45%. There were several factors independent of PRICE and SEER which may have affected the accuracy of the results in the present study including: uncertainty in the technical data used for the estimates, the methods used to estimate uncertainty in spacecraft component mass and numbers of prototypes, and the experience of the estimators.

Paul D Friz↗

Blind Study Validating Parametric Costing Tools PRICE True Planning and SEER-H for NASA Science Missions

Two of the primary parametric costing tools used to estimate the development and production cost of future spacecraft hardware are PRICE True Planning - Space Missions Catalog by PRICE Systems, and SEER-H by Galorath. These are standard tools used by NASA and industry to estimate the cost of new aerospace hardware. However, no independent verification of the accuracy of these tools is publicly available. Both PRICE Systems and Galorath have completed internal validation studies of their parametric cost estimating tools; however, they only provided the results of the studies and did not detail the exact methods used to perform the validation. In the present study, cost estimators used PRICE True Planning and SEER-H to estimate the cost of twelve different past NASA science missions. The estimators were prevented from knowing the actual cost of the missions in an effort to minimize cognitive biases. In the present study, SEER had an average error of 23%, median error of -0.3%, with a standard deviation of 43%. PRICE had an average error of 52%, median error of 50%, and standard deviation of 45%. There were several factors independent of PRICE and SEER which may have affected the accuracy of the results in the present study including: uncertainty in the technical data used for the estimates, the methods used to estimate uncertainty in spacecraft component mass and numbers of prototypes, and the experience of the estimators.

Friz, Paul D.↗

Space Suit Portable Life Support System (PLSS) 2.0 Unmanned Vacuum Environment Testing

For the first time in more than 30 years, an advanced space suit Portable Life Support System (PLSS) design was operated inside a vacuum chamber representative of the flight operating environment. The test article, PLSS 2.0, was the second system-level integrated prototype of the advanced PLSS design, following the PLSS 1.0 Breadboard that was developed and tested throughout 2011. Whereas PLSS 1.0 included five technology development components with the balance the system simulated using commercial-off-the-shelf items, PLSS 2.0 featured first generation or later prototypes for all components less instrumentation, tubing and fittings. Developed throughout 2012, PLSS 2.0 was the first attempt to package the system into a flight-like representative volume. PLSS 2.0 testing included an extensive functional evaluation known as Pre-Installation Acceptance (PIA) testing, Human-in-the-Loop testing in which the PLSS 2.0 prototype was integrated via umbilicals to a manned prototype space suit for 19 two-hour simulated EVAs, and unmanned vacuum environment testing. Unmanned vacuum environment testing took place from 1/9/15-7/9/15 with PLSS 2.0 located inside a vacuum chamber. Test sequences included performance mapping of several components, carbon dioxide removal evaluations at simulated intravehicular activity (IVA) conditions, a regulator pressure schedule assessment, and culminated with 25 simulated extravehicular activities (EVAs). During the unmanned vacuum environment test series, PLSS 2.0 accumulated 378 hours of integrated testing including 291 hours of operation in a vacuum environment and 199 hours of simulated EVA time. The PLSS prototype performed nominally throughout the test series, with two notable exceptions including a pump failure and a Spacesuit Water Membrane Evaporator (SWME) leak, for which post-test failure investigations were performed. In addition to generating an extensive database of PLSS 2.0 performance data, achievements included requirements and operational concepts verification, as well as demonstration of vehicular interfaces, consumables sizing and recharge, and water quality control.

Watts, Carly↗

Modelica-json: Transforming energy models to digitize the control delivery process

Building simulation models are typically not used to generate the documentation required for bidding and project delivery of commercial building systems, or for their semantic modeling and commissioning. This paper presents a software tool that aids in digitizing the control delivery process, spanning simulation during design to implementation and formal verification during commissioning. The tool can generate from Modelica models digital documentation of control sequences. This digital documentation, along with other project drawings and specifications can be used for project bidding. It can also be used for implementation of control sequences through machineto-machine translation to commercial legacy control products, for which we are currently developing the proposed ASHRAE Standard 231P based on the presented work. Moreover, as-installed control sequences can be formally verified against the design specification, and a semantic model in Brick can be exported to aid in configuration of building analytics and fault detection. The paper presents what we believe is the first translation of a Modelica-implemented control sequence to a native implementation on a commercial control platform, using the webCTRL product line from Automated Logic. The paper also shows how a webCTRL implementation can be formally verified against its Modelica specification. These use cases have all been demonstrated with a prototype implementation that is now being further developed.

Wetter, Michael↗

Modeling of Transport Processes in Liquid-Metal Fusion Blankets: Past, Present, and Future

The successful development of robust breeding blanket systems will strongly rely on computational tools for predicting the complex behavior of the electrically conducting liquid-metal (LM) breeder flowing in the complex-shaped blanket ducts in the presence of a strong plasma-confining magnetic field, volumetric heating, and tritium generation. Associated transport processes involve magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) flows, heat transfer, corrosion, and tritium transport. This paper is an overview of past and present efforts in the development, application, and verification and validation (V&V) of such computational tools. As a result of the ongoing campaign on V&V of computer codes for LM blankets, the international fusion community has identified several candidates that promise to become real blanket design and analysis tools in the near future. Among them are HIMAG, MHD-UCAS, COMSOL Multiphysics, ANSYS FLUENT, ANSYS CFX, and OpenFOAM. The progress, over the last decade, in the application of such codes in blanket studies is tremendous. This is illustrated with two examples for a dual-coolant lead-lithium (DCLL) blanket: (1) integrated computer modeling for the recently designed DCLL blanket in the United States and (2) application of the code MHD-UCAS to the analysis of PbLi flows and heat transfer in a generic DCLL blanket prototype at high Hartmann (Ha ~ 10 4 ) and Grashof numbers (Gr ~ 10 12 ). Here, this paper also presents an approach to the development of a new integrated computational tool called the virtual dual-coolant lead-lithium (VDCLL) blanket, which elaborates the existing U.S. MHD code HIMAG.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗

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↗