Results for “model checking” — Page 19

NASA NTRS2002

Launch Vehicle Sizing Benefits Utilizing Main Propulsion System Crossfeed and Project Status

To meet the goals for a next generation Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV), a unique propulsion feed system concept was identified using crossfeed between the booster and orbiter stages that could reduce the Two-Stage-to-Orbit (TSTO) vehicle weight and Design, Development, Test and Evaluation (DDT&E) costs by approximately 25%, while increasing safety and reliability. The Main Propulsion System (MPS) crossfeed water demonstration test program addresses all activities required to reduce the risks for the MPS crossfeed system from a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of 2 to 4 by the completion of testing and analysis by June 2003. During the initial period, that ended in March 2002, a subscale water flow test article was defined. Procurement of a subscale crossfeed check valve was initiated and the specifications for the various components were developed. The fluid transient and pressurization analytical models were developed separately and successfully integrated. The test matrix for the water flow test was developed to correlate the integrated model. A computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model of the crossfeed check valve was developed to assess flow disturbances and internal flow dynamics. Based on the results, the passive crossfeed system concept was very feasible and offered a safe system to be used in an RLV architecture. A water flow test article was designed to accommodate a wide range of flows simulating a number of different types of propellant systems. During the follow-on period, the crossfeed system model will be further refined, the test article will be completed, the water flow test will be performed, and finally the crossfeed system model will be correlated with the test data. This validated computer model will be used to predict the full-scale vehicle crossfeed system performance.

Chandler, Frank↗

NASA NTRS2000

Resin Film Infusion (RFI) Process Modeling for Large Transport Aircraft Wing Structures

This investigation completed the verification of a three-dimensional resin transfer molding/resin film infusion (RTM/RFI) process simulation model. The model incorporates resin flow through an anisotropic carbon fiber preform, cure kinetics of the resin, and heat transfer within the preform/tool assembly. The computer model can predict the flow front location, resin pressure distribution, and thermal profiles in the modeled part. The formulation for the flow model is given using the finite element/control volume (FE/CV) technique based on Darcy's Law of creeping flow through a porous media. The FE/CV technique is a numerically efficient method for finding the flow front location and the fluid pressure. The heat transfer model is based on the three-dimensional, transient heat conduction equation, including heat generation. Boundary conditions include specified temperature and convection. The code was designed with a modular approach so the flow and/or the thermal module may be turned on or off as desired. Both models are solved sequentially in a quasi-steady state fashion. A mesh refinement study was completed on a one-element thick model to determine the recommended size of elements that would result in a converged model for a typical RFI analysis. Guidelines are established for checking the convergence of a model, and the recommended element sizes are listed. Several experiments were conducted and computer simulations of the experiments were run to verify the simulation model. Isothermal, non-reacting flow in a T-stiffened section was simulated to verify the flow module. Predicted infiltration times were within 12-20% of measured times. The predicted pressures were approximately 50% of the measured pressures. A study was performed to attempt to explain the difference in pressures. Non-isothermal experiments with a reactive resin were modeled to verify the thermal module and the resin model. Two panels were manufactured using the RFI process. One was a stepped panel and the other was a panel with two 'T' stiffeners. The difference between the predicted infiltration times and the experimental times was 4% to 23%.

Loos, Alfred C.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Estimation of Daily PM(sub 10) Concentrations in Italy (2006-2012) Using Finely Resolved Satellite Data, Land Use Variables and Meteorology

Health effects of air pollution, especially particulate matter (PM), have been widely investigated. However, most of the studies rely on few monitors located in urban areas for short-term assessments, or land use/dispersion modelling for long-term evaluations, again mostly in cities. Recently, the availability of finely resolved satellite data provides an opportunity to estimate daily concentrations of air pollutants over wide spatio-temporal domains. Italy lacks a robust and validated high resolution spatio-temporally resolved model of particulate matter. The complex topography and the air mixture from both natural and anthropogenic sources are great challenges difficult to be addressed. We combined finely resolved data on Aerosol Optical Depth (AOD) from the Multi-Angle Implementation of Atmospheric Correction (MAIAC) algorithm, ground-level PM10measurements, land-use variables and meteorological parameters into a four-stage mixed model framework to derive estimates of daily PM10concentrations at 1-km2 grid over Italy, for the years 2006-2012. We checked performance of our models by applying 10-fold cross-validation (CV) for each year. Our models displayed good fitting, with mean CV-R2=0.65 and little bias (average slope of predicted VS observed PM10=0.99). Out-of-sample predictions were more accurate in Northern Italy (Po valley) and large conurbations (e.g. Rome), for background monitoring stations, and in the winter season. Resulting concentration maps showed highest average PM10levels in specific areas (Po river valley, main industrial and metropolitan areas) with decreasing trends over time. Our daily predictions of PM10concentrations across the whole Italy will allow, for the first time, estimation of long-term and short-term effects of air pollution nationwide, even in areas lacking monitoring data. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Particulate Matter/analysis↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

New Approach for the Assessment of Interactions of a Strain-Gage Balance

A new approach was developed to assess interactions of a strain-gage balance. The approach compares interactions observed during a calibration of the balance with interactions observed during the application of check loads. The approach assumes that alignment errors of the calibration loads are negligible. In that case, interactions observed during the calibration can be used as a reference for the assessment of interactions of check loads. The new approach first fits interactions of a single-component load of the calibration data using simple regression models. Then, interactions of the check loads are predicted by using the check load values as inputs for the regression models of the interactions. In the next step, absolute values of differences between predicted and observed interactions of the check loads are computed. Afterwards, the largest differences are compared with empirical thresholds to assess how well the interactions of the check load data agree with the interactions of the calibration data. Recently obtained data sets of a six-component force balance are used to illustrate the application of the new approach. It is also demonstrated how knowledge of balance design characteristics can benefit the assessment of interactions.

wind tunnel test↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boil Off Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

Cameron J. Hines↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boil Off Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boil Off Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boiloff Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗

NASA NTRS1966

Error rate reduction of parity checked telemetry data by likelihood deletion strategy

Theoretical model and application of error rate reduction of parity checked telemetry data by likelihood deletion strategy

SPACE COMMUNICATION↗

NASA NTRS2015

Inconsistent Strategies to Spin up Models in CMIP5: Implications for Ocean Biogeochemical Model Performance Assessment

During the fifth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) substantial efforts were made to systematically assess the skill of Earth system models. One goal was to check how realistically representative marine biogeochemical tracer distributions could be reproduced by models. In routine assessments model historical hindcasts were compared with available modern biogeochemical observations. However, these assessments considered neither how close modeled biogeochemical reservoirs were to equilibrium nor the sensitivity of model performance to initial conditions or to the spin-up protocols. Here, we explore how the large diversity in spin-up protocols used for marine biogeochemistry in CMIP5 Earth system models (ESMs) contributes to model-to-model differences in the simulated fields. We take advantage of a 500-year spin-up simulation of IPSL-CM5A-LR to quantify the influence of the spin-up protocol on model ability to reproduce relevant data fields. Amplification of biases in selected biogeochemical fields (O2, NO3, Alk-DIC) is assessed as a function of spin-up duration. We demonstrate that a relationship between spin-up duration and assessment metrics emerges from our model results and holds when confronted with a larger ensemble of CMIP5 models. This shows that drift has implications for performance assessment in addition to possibly aliasing estimates of climate change impact. Our study suggests that differences in spin-up protocols could explain a substantial part of model disparities, constituting a source of model-to- model uncertainty. This requires more attention in future model intercomparison exercises in order to provide quantitatively more correct ESM results on marine biogeochemistry and carbon cycle feedbacks.

histories↗

NASA NTRS2019

Bumper: A Tool for Analyzing Spacecraft Micrometeoroid and Orbital Debris Risk

“Bumper” is NASA’s computer program for analyzing spacecraft micrometeoroid and orbital debris (MMOD) risk. Bumper was developed in the late-1980s and has been continuously used and maintained since. The user base has grown from a few government entities to now include numerous commercial entities as well. The NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) Hypervelocity Impact Technology (HVIT) Team is responsible for all aspects of the Bumper software. Bumper has been used to characterize MMOD risk on hundreds of spacecraft. All of the International Space Station (ISS) modules, visiting vehicles and numerous external components and systems have been analyzed. Bumper was used to analyze each of the Space Shuttle missions since STS-50. The Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) MMOD shielding is being developed using Bumper as well. Bumper has also been used on numerous telescopes (Hubble, James Webb, and Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescopes), scientific probes (Stardust, New Horizons, Parker Solar Probe), and Earth observation satellites (Landsat, Joint Polar Satellite System). Bumper is also being used to analyze the micrometeoroid risk and support design of the Deep Space Gateway (DSG) and Mars Sample Return (MSR) missions. The HVIT Bumper Configuration Control Board (CCB) ensures that all changes to the code are approved, reviewed, and documented. Most of the changes are made to add new MMOD damage “ballistic limit equations” (BLEs). BLEs are typically added in response to completion of a hypervelocity impact (HVI) test series and development of an associated BLE. Other less frequent changes include updates of the debris or meteoroid environment models, feature enhancements, and feature retirement. Some BLEs are commercially sensitive and/or proprietary, so the CCB also manages code user-version control and software distribution. The current version – “Bumper 3” – is a FORTRAN executable that utilizes a 64-bit architecture. Bumper 3 has numerous features that make it a powerful tool for analyzing spacecraft MMOD risk. Bumper uses the latest orbital debris and micrometeoroid environment models. Bumper also easily processes large spacecraft geometry models, recognizes hidden surfaces, permits BLE assignment by name or number, and conducts quality checks of the spacecraft geometry model. Bumper 3 can also be used to estimate the effects of particle penetration through thin, high-standoff distance hardware components such as solar arrays and radiators. This is done using a special HVIT-developed technique know as the “3-Part Analysis.” The paper introduces the Bumper 3 MMOD risk analysis code and provides an example MMOD risk assessment showing Bumper’s role in the overall MMOD protection design process.

Lear, Dana M.↗

NASA NTRS2012

Projections of Declining Surface-Water Availability for the Southwestern United States

16 of the CMIP5 models had all the data needed for this work for at least one simulation that was continuous from 1950 to 2040. Details of the models analyzed here are provided in Table S1. The model data analyzed here are available at http://strega.ldeo.columbia.edu:81/expert/home/.naomi/.AR5/.v2/.historical:rcp85/.mmm16/ a. Assessing the climatology of the models Despite increases in horizontal resolution of many models compared to their CMIP3 counterparts none of these models can adequately resolve the topography of the south west United States, such as the Sierra Nevada and Rocky Mountains and the associated orographic precipitation. This requires that caution be used when interpreting the results presented here. To assess the ability of the models to simulate the current hydroclimate, in Figure S1 we show the observed (from the Global Precipitation Climatology Centre gridded rain gauge data, (1)) monthly climatology of precipitation and the same for all the models and the multimodel mean for the California-Nevada, Colorado headwaters and Texas regions. The GPCC data uses rain gauges only and interpolates to regular grids of which we used the 1◦ by 1◦ one. Details of the data set can be found in (2). While the models apparently overestimate precipitation in California and Nevada the seasonal cycle with wet winters and dry summers is very well represented. It is also possible that the rain gauge observations are biased low by inadequately sampling the higher mountain regions. How ever the models might also be expected to underestimate orographic precipitation due to inadequate horizontal resolution. The 25 models are also too wet in the Colorado headwaters region but correctly represent the quite even distribution though the year. The bimodal distribution of precipitation in Texas, with peaks in May and September, and the absolute amounts, are well modeled but with the September peak too weak. The positive precipitation bias translates into a positive runoff bias for the Colorado headwaters as also shown in Figure S1. Here the observed runoff values are taken from simulations of the Variable Infiltration Capacity (VIC) land surface-hydrology model (3) forced by observed meteorology (5) that were conducted as part of the North American Land Data Assimilation System project phase 2 ( (NLDAS-2), http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/mmb/nldas/. Runoff for California-Nevada is better simulated but there is a positive bias over Texas despite no strong precipitation bias. To check whether regional climate models better simulate P and runoff in these regions we analyzed the historical simulation with the Regional Climate Model version 3 driven by the National Centers for Environmental Prediction-Department of Energy Reanalysis 2 available from the North American Regional Climate Change Assessment Program (http://www.narccap.ucar.edu). This model configuration retained these biases in P and runoff although they were reduced in amplitude. Given these varying biases we plot P and P − E changes in actual values but apply the simplest bias correction possible to the runoff and soil moisture values and show the modeled changes in terms of percentages of the 20th Century model climatologies. A thorough assessment of the simulation of North American climate in CMIP5 models is conducted in Sheffield at al. (North American Climate in CMIP5 Experiments. Part I: Evaluation of 20th Century Continental and Regional Climatology, manuscript submit ted to J. Climate, available at http://www.climate.noaa.gov/index.jsp?pg=./cpo pa/ mapp/cmip5 publications.html). Sheffield et al. analyze the climatology of precipitation, surface air temperature, low level winds, moisture fluxes, runoff etc. and conclude that the main features of the hydrological cycle, including characteristics of the atmospheric moisture balance and its seasonality, are captured in the CMP5 models subject to biases in total precipitation amounts. We chose to use all available models instead of selecting some and rejecting others based on an assessment of model realism. This is in accord with the suggestions of Mote et al. for CMIP3 (4) but future work needs to revisit this matter for the case of the CMIP5 ensemble.

Seager, Richard↗

NASA NTRS2007

Spectral Retrieval of Latent Heating Profiles from TRMM PR data: Moistening Estimates over Tropical Ocean Regions - Part 3

The global hydrological cycle is central to the Earth's climate system, with rainfall and the physics of precipitation formation acting as the key links in the cycle. Two-thirds of global rainfall occurs in the tropics with the associated latent heating (LH) accounting for threefourths of the total heat energy available to the Earth's atmosphere. In the last decade, it has been established that standard products of LH from satellite measurements, particularly TRMM measurements, would be a valuable resource for scientific research and applications. Such products would enable new insights and investigations concerning the complexities of convection system life cycles, the diabatic heating controls and feedbacks related to rne-sosynoptic circulations and their forecasting, the relationship of tropical patterns of LH to the global circulation and climate, and strategies for improving cloud parameterizations In environmental prediction models. However, the LH and water vapor profile or budget (called the apparent moisture sink, or Q2) is closely related. This paper presented the development of an algorithm for retrieving Q2 using 'TRMM precipitation radar. Since there is no direct measurement of LH and Q2, the validation of algorithm usually applies a method called consistency check. Consistency checking involving Cloud Resolving Model (CRM)-generated LH and 42 profiles and algorithm-reconstructed is a useful step in evaluating the performance of a given algorithm. In this process, the CRM simulation of a time-dependent precipitation process (multiple-day time series) is used to obtain the required input parameters for a given algorithm. The algorithm is then used to "~econsti-LKt~h"e heating and moisture profiles that the CRM simulation originally produced, and finally both sets of conformal estimates (model and algorithm) are compared each other. The results indicate that discrepancies between the reconstructed and CM-simulated profiles for Q2, especially at low levels, are larger than those for latent heat. Larger discrepancies in Q2 at low levels are due to moistening for non-precipitating region that algorithm cannot reconstruct. Nevertheless, the algorithm-reconstructed total Q2 profiles are in good agreement with the CRM-simulated ones.

Shige, S.↗

NASA NTRS1977

Possible controls on the bulk composition of the earth - Implications for the origin of the earth and moon

It is pointed out that speculation regarding the bulk chemical composition of the earth, especially its radial distribution, is important for testing ideas on the origin of the earth-moon system. Definitive solutions are, however, unattainable. The reported investigation is concerned with an attempt to select the more plausible possibilities. The evidence on the chemical distribution in the earth is examined and the resulting models of bulk composition are used to check the plausibility of the Ganapathy-Anders model. It is suggested that the chemistry of the earth and moon can be modeled more plausibly in the context of slow, cool accretion of the earth and either simultaneous accretion or disintegrative capture of the moon than by fission or volatilization models based on a hot earth. Many possible aspects need detailed quantitative study including the relation between U content, other heat sources, and heat flow on earth.

Smith, J. V.↗

NASA NTRS1988

The reflection of solar radiation from bar cloud arrays

An analytical solution for the albedo to solar radiation of a broken cloud field over a black, nonreflecting ocean surface is presented. The model and its underlying assumptions are described, and some of the results are presented in the form of an effective cloudiness. The model is compared to previous results, and tables of necessary functions for carrying out independent checks and applications of the model are presented. The applications of the results to climate and climate sensitivity are addressed.

Joseph, Joachim H.↗

NASA NTRS2004

UIVerify: A Web-Based Tool for Verification and Automatic Generation of User Interfaces

In this poster, we describe a web-based tool for verification and automatic generation of user interfaces. The verification component of the tool accepts as input a model of a machine and a model of its interface, and checks that the interface is adequate (correct). The generation component of the tool accepts a model of a given machine and the user's task, and then generates a correct and succinct interface. This write-up will demonstrate the usefulness of the tool by verifying the correctness of a user interface to a flight-control system. The poster will include two more examples of using the tool: verification of the interface to an espresso machine, and automatic generation of a succinct interface to a large hypothetical machine.

Shiffman, Smadar↗

NASA NTRS1977

Structural model integrity

Many of the practical aspects and problems of ensuring the integrity of a structural model are discussed, as well as the steps which have been taken in the NASTRAN system to assure that these checks can be routinely performed. Model integrity as used applies not only to the structural model but also to the loads applied to the model. Emphasis is also placed on the fact that when dealing with substructure analysis, all of the checking procedures discussed should be applied at the lowest level of substructure prior to any coupling.

Wallerstein, D. V.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Should Pruning be a Pre-Processor of any Linear System?

There are many real-world problems whose mathematical models turn out to be linear systems Ax = b , where A is an m by x n matrix. Each equation of the linear system is an information. An information, in a physical problem, such as 4 mangoes, 6 bananas, and 5 oranges cost $10, is mathematically modeled as 4x(sub 1) + 6x(sub 2) + 5x (sub 3) = 10, where x(sub 1), x(sub 2), x(sub 3) are each cost of one mango, that of one banana, and that of one orange, respectively. All the information put together in a specified context, constitutes the physical problem and need not be all distinct. Some of these could be redundant, which cannot be readily identified by inspection. The resulting mathematical model will thus have equations corresponding to this redundant information and hence are linearly dependent and thus superfluous. Consequently, these equations once identified should be better pruned in the process of solving the system. The benefits are (i) less computation and hence less error and consequently a better quality of solution and (ii) reduced storage requirements. In literature, the pruning concept is not in vogue so far although it is most desirable. In a numerical linear system, the system could be slightly inconsistent or inconsistent of varying degree. If the system is too inconsistent, then we should fall back on to the physical problem (PP), check the correctness of the PP derived from the material universe, modify it, if necessary, and then check the corresponding mathematical model (MM) and correct it. In nature/material universe, inconsistency is completely nonexistent. If the MM becomes inconsistent, it could be due to error introduced by the concerned measuring device and/or due to assumptions made on the PP to obtain an MM which is relatively easily solvable or simply due to human error. No measuring device can usually measure a quantity with an accuracy greater that 0.005% or, equivalently with a relative error less than 0.005%. Hence measurement error is unavoidable in a numerical linear system when the quantities are continuous (or even discrete with extremely large number). Assumptions, though not desirable, are usually made when we find the problem sufficiently difficult to be solved within the available means/tools/resources and hence distort the PP and the corresponding MM. The error thus introduced in the system could (not always necessarily though) make the system somewhat inconsistent. If the inconsistency (contradiction) is too much then one should definitely not proceed to solve the system in terms of getting a least-squares solution or a minimum norm solution or the minimum-norm least-squares solution. All these solutions will be invariably of no real-world use. If, on the other hand, inconsistency is reasonably low, i.e. the system is near-consistent or, equivalently, has near-linearly-dependent rows, then the foregoing solutions are useful. Pruning in such a near-consistent system should be performed based on the desired accuracy and on the definition of near-linear dependence. In this article, we discuss pruning over various kinds of linear systems and strongly suggest its use as a pre-processor or as a part of an algorithm. Ideally pruning should (i) be a part of the solution process (algorithm) of the system, (ii) reduce both computational error and complexity of the process, and (iii) take into account the numerical zero defined in the context. These are precisely what we achieve through our proposed O(mn2) algorithm presented in Matlab, that uses a subprogram of solving a single linear equation and that has embedded in it the pruning.

Sen, Syamal K.↗